JD Power: Toyota's Scion worse than any American car in long term reliability

[divideandconquer]

Chrysler above average, Mercedes in long term reliability

Chrysler scored above the average in J.D. Power’s three-year reliability survey, which looked at repairs to 2006 vehicles. Jaguar and General Motor’s Buick headed the list this year with just 122 problems per hundred vehicles each; Lexus trailed the American and British firms, with 126 problems per hundred, and Toyota came in close behind at 129. Oddly, the Scion brand, made by Toyota, came in very low, at 222 problems per hundred vehicles – lower than any American vehicles.

<http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/2009/10/chrysler-above-average-mercedes-in-long-term-reliability>

[old mark]

1. Used to own a Toyota, and I can believe it....I wonder how they scored VW's -

I recently traded my '99 Passat for junk value-It was my 5th VW, and certainly my last.
VW has abandoned all concern for the customer after the sale.


mark

[alfredo]

65. They didn't fare very well.

The worst record was held by Suzuki, with 263 problems per hundred vehicles; and by German automaker Volkswagen, with 260.

[old mark]

80. Hell, I had near that many just on my car! We traded it in on an old

Hyundai Santa Fe, the best car we ever had.

mark

[alfredo]

93. I bought a used 97 Hyundai Elantra for $1,000 back in 2004 and it has

been a fine little car. It has some damage on the front, but I see that as theft insurance.

[wtmusic]

2. Chrysler far below Toyota on JDPower website

http://www.jdpower.com/autos/ratings/dependability-ratings-by-brand/sortcolumn-1/ascending/page-#page-anchor

[SmileyRose]

36. sure enough SCION is well under all American cars

Long term - over the course of 10 years, Toyota does about the same as every other car brand overall depending on what part of the country the car is driven in regularly.

[wtmusic]

37. Can you back that up? nt

[SmileyRose]

49. It's right there on the link scroll down to Scion - way way down.

http://www.jdpower.com/autos/ratings/dependability-ratings-by-brand/sortcolumn-1/ascending/page-#page-anchor


Your link even. Did you read it?

[wtmusic]

58. Not that part.

"over the course of 10 years, Toyota does about the same as every other car"

[divideandconquer]

64. Here's an MSN reliability index on 10 year old Toyota Camry's

10 year old Toyota Camrys are notorious for bad engines due to sludge.

<http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/reliability.aspx?year=1999&make=Toyota&model=Camry>

[SmileyRose]

70. Any car will last forever - it's a matter of economics

at some point a car becomes more expensive to maintain than the owner wants to spend. Edmunds has a good online calculator. You'll find the 10 year cost amongst the major manufacturers within each class run within a fraction of a cent per mile to own. While the mix of what the money is spent on varies, people make decisions based on overall economics versus their attachment to the car.

You can find a story somewhere of a Yugo with 100's of 1000's of miles on it because someone somewhere was willing to pony up the dough to keep it running.

I can appreciate the fact a Toyota owner looks at his 1999 Camry and may have only had it in the shop for normal wear and tear plus maybe one or 2 major breakdowns tops - and the 1999 Ford Taurus the neighbor owns seems to have been in the shop at least once a year for the last 5 years. However, when the costs associated with the car's ownership are added up over time, they come out nearly identical.

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/cto/CTOintroController

[Statistical]

88. If first 5 years maybe.

Most powertrains are protected by 5 year warranty. When you start getting into 7, 10, 12 years old the models really seperate themselves.

However one point is stats only give you a place to start. Individual vehicles vary. So even buying a model with low TCO is no guarantee however I would rather stack the deck in my favor rather than against me.

[Kalyke]

3. Not surprising.

Every foreign car I've been associated with (I've never owned one, but had family members who have) has been a piece of crap and in the shop nearly as much as they're on the road.

[stray cat]

7. I had a dodge aries - it was an American piece of crap

The Nissan sentra wasn't much good either. My toyota corolla so far has been fantastic - 7 years old and no repairs yet.

[bbgrunt]

27. my RAV is 7 and the only thing it has needed were new wiper blade inserts.

[amandabeech]

219. Roommate's Corolla is about the same age, and it's a piece of junk.

His characterization.

My Taurus does much, much better.

As does my other roommate's U.S. brand van.

Other roommate, a Euro, wants a BMW. I don't know if he knows a good mechanic.

[ReverendDeuce]

11. That's an interesting generalization...

Considering that most manufacturers have "budget" brands, and Scion certainly is Toyota's, it doesn't surprise me that the ratings are low.

As far as personal experience, I'd beg to differ -- every American car I've owned started developing problems at around 25K miles. They could be little problems like buttons not working, trim coming loose, all the way to major issues like complete ECU failure, new transmission, etc. My Infiniti (Japanese) sedan now has 54K miles without a hint of a problem. No trim falling off, no squeaks, no issues with any of the features or gadgets, and the mechanics of everything still feel tight and right. It's the best car I've ever owned.

I'm interested in what GM is going to do in the next few years. It seems that they're putting good money to use now that they are on our dime. If they can keep it up, as Buick is doing, they could get my attention.

I'm also interested in Tesla's new sedan that is to come out in 2011.

[question everything]

30. Had a Chevy Vega and a Ford Mustang - was glad to get rid of them

after few years.

Have been driving Toyota Camrys and Volvos for more than 10 years each.

[amandabeech]

220. I don't think that a comparison between a late model U.S. car and the Vega is a fair comparison .

Even Consumer Reports rates U.S. cars as having improved tremendously since then, and Consumer Reports used to LOVE the Camrys. Now they like Fords and Buicks.

As for the Volvo, Consumer Reports says it's nothing special.

I can't believe that you're still talking about the Vega. That's 30 years ago. Times really do change.

[JerseygirlCT]

33. My experience is nearly opposite

Ford Escort and Linx - both total pieces of crap. The Chevy Cavalier I had actually ran pretty well with little maintenance. My Subarus were great, so far my VW is. The PT Loser we had, I absolutely hated. Ditto the Chrysler minivan years back... not sure which model. Awful car.

Maybe it's partly a crap-shoot, and the particular car you get might vary from the norm. But in general, my Subarus and the VW run better, more smoothly. They're more fun to drive, and we've had fewer problems with them.

[prole_for_peace]

48. My Cavaliers ('91 & '98) ran great

I didn't have any problems with either one. Now I have a '08 Corolla and so far no problems either

[JerseygirlCT]

54. Mine was a used car, so I wasn't quite sure what to expect of it

but it did very well, until it met an untimely death due to ice and a guardrail.

[Xicano]

39. Its been the opposite for me

Every American made car I've owned has been a piece of crap always in need of repair of something. While my Toyotas I've owned never needed repair except your regular tune-ups, tire and break changes.

[Horse with no Name]

59. I have a 93 Corolla sitting in my driveway

that has nothing major done--just routine stuff.
That's a pretty good investment wouldn't you say?

[Mixopterus]

83. 92 Corolla here

Nothing too serious, especially considering the previous owner was involved in an accident and it was sitting in a lot for a long time in less than ideal conditions.

I also abuse the hell out of it, I'm a bad car owner :(

[Mudoria]

4. Buick #1

Next time I'm in the market for an auto I'll take a serious look at them.

[blue_onyx]

17. I may get a Buick too

I have a Buick now but it's getting older. Whenever I can afford a new car, I'll look at Buick if my budget allows it. The new LaCrosse looks fantastic but is too expensive for me ($27,000). GM just annouced they are bring back the Regal which will be smaller so I might be able to get that one.

[safeinOhio]

23. Damn Buick

I just had the brakes shoes replaced and they are still making a noise. I'd write them and ask what they are going to do about it, except it is a 1950 Buick Special.:crazy:

[Statistical]

31. GM can make a comeback centered on Buick brand.

My understanding is it has high customer loyalty also.

[tabbycat31]

57. for that to happen, they need to remarket the brand

it's very hard to find anyone under 70 driving a Buick around here. The one person under 70 I knew who drove a Buick inherited her grandfather's car.

[Mixopterus]

77. A significantly higher MPG would help too

18-19 mpg seems to the average for Buick, which is not very good.

[EOTE]

94. That doesn't sound right to me.

Buick as of very recently made some of the most fuel efficient large sedans you could get. The now discontinued Park Avenue with the old corporate 3.8 liter V6 got much better fuel economy than the similarly sized Ford Crown Vic and the Toyota Avalon. I know they've moved from the old OHV 3.8 to the new DOHC 3.6 liter, but I've heard that this new engine does well in the fuel economy department as well. As far as I can tell, only the Buick Enclave which is a fairly large SUV averages 19 MPG. The Lacrosse and Lucerne both get mid 20s.

[blue_onyx]

95. Buick's mpg is about the same as Lexus

Lacrosse: 21 (17/27)
GS 350: 22 (19/26)

Enclave: 19 (17/24)
Rx 350: 21 (18/25)

[Mixopterus]

114. But does Buick make economy cars?

I don't think they do.

[blue_onyx]

117. Huh?

What does this have to do with anything?

[Mixopterus]

120. Just curious

[blue_onyx]

121. Oh, ok

I thought you were making more a statement, rather than a question.

Buick was more of an "economy" car. The price of the LaCrosse was around 23,000 (not much higher than the Chevy Malibu). GM is currently moving the brand more high-end (they want it to be like Lexus). So the LaCrosse is now $27,000 (and a much better looking of vehicle too).

[taught_me_patience]

106. Buy a used one because depreciation on Buicks is really bad

Their image is an "old man's car".

[blue_onyx]

107. With the new vehicles Buick is putting out...

they won't be an "old man's car" much longer. They may never appeal to teens but neither does Lexus.

[GermanDem]

177. used Buicks are a great deal

We bought our Buick Century in 2000 with 25,000 miles (1 year old) for $11,500, drove it for 9 years until I was rear-ended and totaled. We got $4,500 from the insurance for it (it had 95,000 miles on it). We had only one big repair ($1000 to rebuild the engine). It was very reliable, and the gas mileage was decent. Very comfortable car, I liked it a lot! But it is definitely not a sexy, flashy car! But you never get pulled over in it by the cops LOL, because they consider it a granny car... If they would make a fuel efficient, even a hybrid Buick, I would buy it in a heartbeat. Driving a Prius now, and loving it!

[madmom]

5. Oh but this can't be true, American cars are junk .....

:sarcasm: some one might need this

[Bluenorthwest]

6. Chrysler 165 per hundred Toyota at 129

Meaning Toyota outranked Chrysler, which had no cars in the top slots at all. Jag, Buick, Lexus (a Toyota brand) and Toyota are the top four in reliability on the list.

[divideandconquer]

9. Dodge Caravan beat the Toyota Sienna and Honda Odessey

and of course Scion was worse than any American car.

Buick's been giving Toyota a hard time for awhile, where's the media?

[Bluenorthwest]

13. Where are the ads?

In the commercial arena, there is no need to wait for 'the media' one simply makes a buy and a spot and tells what one wishes to tell. If Buick's message is not known, that is in fact part of the over all problem. A problem they need to solve. If you can not market it, don't bother making it. I think they have old and dated thinking that needs to go. My Dad drove Buicks and they still sound like they are talking to him, designing for him as well. Selling a product is important and they don't do it right.

[stray cat]

8. It looks like Americans have finally found 1 toyota brand they can beat

thank you scion for giving us some pride

[divideandconquer]

10. Buick has been beating Toyota for awhile, doesn't that count?

The amazing thing about Scion is that they are about the simplest cars made, VW's sold in the US are about the most complicated. (AWD, convertibles, turbos, 6 speed automatics, etc)

[Statistical]

18. Scions are also low price. Hard to make high quality low price product.

[divideandconquer]

20. Other low price cars beat Scion

I would think the hard car to build would be a VW Touteg, a hybrid, a convertible, an off road vehicle, something with a lot of parts, a rough enviroment or a lot of electronics.

[Statistical]

21. What other brand (remember the rating is for the whole brand) has comparable price?

Kia? Suzuki? Daewoo? Yup the all are bottom of the barrel.

Sure there are other models with similar price but they are the low end of a much larger brand (i.e Chevy sells vehicles that cost $15K but they also sell vehicles that cost $50K).

Since the rating for a brand is the average of all vehicles in the brand and generally (but not always) more expensive vehicles have better quality the higher margin products "bring up the average" so to speak.

If you compare it to other discount brands: Kia, Suzuki, Daewoo they are all right together (at the bottom). Hyundai is the one discount brand which has broken from the pack and moving up into mainstream vehicles.

Scion is simply a "cool" Kia. No better, no worse. It is a Kia without the stigma (yet) of a Kia. IMHO it was a stupid decision by Toyota.

1) The GM model (multiple brands) is a failure. Everyone is going to less brands but Toyota decides to add a nameplate?
2) Although Scion is suppose to be seperate your OP shows how a failure in Scion damages the more profitable Toyota brand.
3) Even more stupid is there is overlap with existing Toyota products. Scions are $15K-$18K but so are Toyota Yaris, Carolla & Matrix with the popular Camry right above that at $19K.

Stupid & Stupid. Not sure what Toyota was thinking. Is there that much money to be made in $15K - $18K segment (that isn't already covered by Yaris, Carolla, Matrix & Camry) to risk one of the most powerful brands in auto industry?

[divideandconquer]

22. Saturn and Hyundai beat Scion

3 years ago neither had many expensive cars

[safeinOhio]

25. $16,000 to $18,000

Not that cheap.

[Statistical]

26. Name all the brands where the nost expensive model is less than $19K

Kia?
Suzuki?
Daewoo?
Scion?

None of them exactly top performers in quality.

Of course I am not denying that Scion sucks.... Scion sucks. It also was a stupid and poorly timed move to make a cheapo brand.
Even worse officially Toyota tries to keep them separate (to prevent bad image of Scion from infecting Toyota Brand). If you go to Scion website there is nothing indicating it is a Toyota subsidiary.
However in reality people call it "Toyota Scion" which can only hurt the more powerful brand.

My guess is Honda replaces Toyota as the premier Japanese brand within a couple years.

[Mudoria]

15. Buick beat Toyota overall

[elocs]

12. Since I own an '06 Scion, that is not good news,

but I haven't had any problems yet and my 3 year warranty will be up the middle of December.

[enlightenment]

14. I have an '08 and so far it runs like a top.

No problems at all; great gas mileage, easy ride, etc.

Meanwhile, my friend's '07 Saturn has been in the shop for major repairs on four different occasions - and my parent's '06 Chevy is a hunk of junk on wheels, in terms of mechanical issues.

Whatever. Nothing is perfect and cars are long past the time when they're built to last. If we had decent public transportation, I'd give mine up in a heartbeat.

[Still Sensible]

16. Bought my daughter a Scion TC last year

One of the factors was that she did some online research and discovered it was very highly rated in its class by Consumer Reports, which rated quality and did not note an uncommon level of problems. Sometimes I wonder if JD Power--or Consumer Reports for that matter--aren't just shills that publish crap to manipulate the public. Maybe I'm just getting ever more cynical.

[amandabeech]

221. Consumer Reports is famous for plugging Toyotas.

They are shills to manipulate the public, but not in the direction you're thinking.

[imdjh]

19. Methodology would be really useful in this article. I'm a pain in the ass.

I have only owned two new cars; a Suzuki and a Toyota.

[depakid]

It's JD Power- that's all you need to know

It's been a joke of an outfit for years.

[divideandconquer]

92. Any proof that they're a joke?

[depakid]

99. Look at their record over the past 25 years!

They've been making laughable inflated statements American cars for as l can remember.

[divideandconquer]

124. Any proof or just conjecture?

[Romulox]

226. This is unsourced nonsense. nt

[Romulox]

227. PS Thank GAWD it passed!

:rofl:

[JerseygirlCT]

24. And it looks like a rolling tissue box. Talk about ugly. nt

[Statistical]

29. The crazy thing is that is why teenager like them. Personally I don't see it.

[JerseygirlCT]

32. No, I don't either

But then again, I found the PT Cruiser we had for a while really homely, too.

I don't like boxy. I like moving lines - curves. Not bumps and boxes.

[question everything]

28. Worse than my 1976 Chevy Vega?

I think that both, the Vega and the Scion are/were aimed at recent grads that this is the only one they can afford. Although I did take it cross country Chicago, San Francisco, LA and back.

[divideandconquer]

38. Back when they were making Vega's, Toyota's weren't very good either

[ellenfl]

34. i drive a 1995 toyota camry.

i have had to replace the electronics in the front doors but i live by the ocean and have to deal with salt effects. otherwise, this car has been exceptional. in fact, if i find that the car is not rusted and otherwise sound, i may eventually just change out the engine . . . maybe for a hybrid . . . instead of buying a new car. i buy reliability because i cannot afford the cost of repairs. i would love to buy american but i have a hard time finding the reliability i need.

my co-worker owns a 2005 vibe and just replaced both outside door handles on the driver side . . . and was told to open the new ones gently so they would last longer. my experience is that interior and body hardware on american cars is crap. she got rid of her ford focus for the vibe because the focus was always in the shop. she only had the focus for a couple of years. not a good reliability record.

ellen fl

[Touchdown]

42. The Pontiac Vibe is the same car as a Toyota Matrix.

It's just rebadged. So your friend has a problem with The Matrix as well as the Vibe.

[ellenfl]

45. are you sure it doesn't just share an engine?

like my colt which had a mitsubishi engine.

ellen fl

[Touchdown]

47. I looked it up. They're the same car.

Both the Vibe and Matrix are based on the all-new Toyota Corolla platform and share the same Toyota engines, transmissions, suspensions, brakes, and GM-designed/Toyota-supplied interior features. Even the warranties are comparable: GM will offer a 5 year/100,000 km powertrain warranty on the Vibe in Canada to match Toyota’s powertrain warranty. Only the cars’ exterior styling, option packages, and name badges are different.










http://www.canadiandriver.com/2001/12/11/vibe-vs-matrix-is-there-really-any-difference.htm

[Mopar151]

53. Colts are Mitsubishi's

Either rebadged for Chrysler (old ones) or built by a joint venture (DiamondStar). Mitsubishi is a BAD company, who makes a few decent products. How bad? Three Diamonds Tuna 'n Dolphin is a Mitsubishi co.

[Touchdown]

97. Their TVs are fantastic though.

Probably the best on the market, IMO. I've had 3 Mitsubishi TVs in my life. Excellent color accuracy.

[SmileyRose]

50. I'm sorry your friend's Vibe is a POS - it was made by Toyota.

[ellenfl]

122. oh, well, nobody's perfect. i hope that's not a commentary

on american workmanship. apparently the shell of the car is american-made, which is where my friend's car has failed.

"Toyota Corolla platform and share the same Toyota engines, transmissions, suspensions, brakes, and GM-designed/Toyota-supplied interior features"

ellen fl

[Romulox]

178. LOL. It's made by an American at a TOYOTA plant.

"Cognitive dissonance"

[ellenfl]

179. that does not mean that the toyota managers don't hold to the

same quality standards as the factories located in japan. the worker does not determine the parts to be used.

ellen fl

[Romulox]

185. LOL. You are playing games (fooling nobody.)

You (not me) said " i hope that's not a commentary on american workmanship. apparently the shell of the car is american-made, which is where my friend's car has failed."

Now you're trying to sidle away from your ridiculous statement. :hi:

[Codeine]

212. The Matrix is also made at that plant.

They rolled off the same assembly line, using the same parts -- they are identical cars except a few body panels at the front and badging. That's it. There are no quality differences.

[Romulox]

228. You just assume that someone with a NASCAR avatar knows about cars.

Lesson learned. :shrug:

[quiller4]

214. Was made - production ceased early in the summer of 09 n/t

[Romulox]

72. Errr, you do know that the Pontiac Vibe is made under contract by Toyota, right?

Errr, right? :rofl:

[quiller4]

217. Nobody makes the Vibe anymore. It is out of production.

[Romulox]

225. When it was made, it was made by Toyota. nt

[flvegan]

35. If 20 years ago, anyone had mentioned "Jaguar" and "reliability" in the same breath

the in-your-face laughing would have been of hurricane proportions.

[Touchdown]

43. Reminds me of a bumper sticker on an XjS once...

The parts falling off of this car are of the highest British quality!:rofl:

[Mopar151]

55. Which Jaguar?

There are Lucas Jags (quirky car with AWFUL electrics), Bosch Jags (Quirky, but a good deal more reliable) and Visteon Jags (Ford ownership and subsequent - my neighbor's seems to run all the time!

Obligatory Lucas joke: What are the positions of a Lucas headlight switch? DIM, Flicker, and OFF

[Fumesucker]

152. Back when I used to ride Brit bikes we called Lucas "The Prince of Darkness"..

Q: Why do Brits drink warm beer?

A: Lucas also makes refrigerators..

[Xicano]

40. A friend of mine's Scion has been problem free after years of hard driving.

Here's a photo of a friend's Scion and after several years with a lot of hard driving its never had any problems and still feels just as tight as it did when it was new.

Lately there seems to be a campaign against Toyota vehicles by a few people here on the DU. I have owned a few Toyotas and every last one of them never gave me any problems whatsoever in the 100+K miles I drove them. I mean absolutely no problems whatsoever. Unfortunately I cannot say the same for any of the American vehicles I've owned.


Photo of friend's Scion with friend in the background.

[divideandconquer]

41. There seems to a "campaign" to lower American's wages and ship our wealth overseas

Talk about misplaced priorities!

[Brickbat]

46. Damn straight.

:thumbsup:

[conflictgirl]

69. GM has done nothing good for my town, state or FAMILY

I exclusively bought American cars like a good little daughter of a UAW autoworker and despite that the big 3 and GM in particular continued to destroy my town, my state and my father's job. They forced my dad into early retirement at age 60 and he still has no idea if he will have the lifetime health benefits he was promised. The other long-timers that my dad worked with have gotten totally screwed over by GM - a couple years ago all the guys on the line were forced to sell their stock when it was at a very cheap price and one of the guys my dad worked with sold the 7000 shares of GM stock he'd bought over the years, intended to be part of his retirement fund, for like $350. HE said he will never buy another GM car as long as he lives - and that is someone who has worked for GM his entire working life! In the past 5-10 years GM has slowly forced out their well-paid union employees with benefits and replaced them with contract employees making $15 an hour.

I live in a GM town in Michigan, in a family in which many people have worked for and retired from the auto industry (GM in this case). Have you ever watched Roger & Me? I'm about 30 miles north of Flint and the same things have happened here. You have no idea how angry many of us are and how betrayed we feel. After buying American cars all my life I recently bought my first Toyota and I have no regrets.

GM has shown NO loyalty to us - why should we show any loyalty to them by continuing to buy their cars?

[Mixopterus]

71. Because

Divideandconquer is a shill, obviously.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: The American citizen has ZERO obligation to fund a corporate entity that has continuously made poor decisions, shirked its own obligation to the public, and generally conducted themselves like greedy apes.

[divideandconquer]

84. But we do have allegiance to foreign companies who lower our standard of living?

I'm just using press reports that tell the truth about Toyota. Do you deny that they built large numbers of cars with sludge problems on their engines or trucks with rust problems on their frames?

Do you dent they have had cars wrecking because of some floormat and/or ignition problem?

Do you deny that their top lawyer has turned against them because he says they're crooks?

Do you deny that they have lowered the standard of living for Americans?

Be a Toyota fanboy all you want but when you talk about shills look in the mirror and when things don't go your way economically look in the driveway.

[Mixopterus]

102. What a laughable series of arguments

You have an obligation to yourself as a person paying money for an item to get the best quality for the best price for an item that meets your needs. If you were really concerned about the American autoworker you should advocate a partial or whole nationalization of the American car companies so we can cut the cancer out of the institution (management) and they can finally build fuel efficient cars that are mechanically reliable and affordable. Until that point, or some renaissance in corporate management, you are only funding a corporate entity that only SOMETIMES uses union labor. The American citizen has no obligation to any corporation. Period.

I am an advocate for the American citizen, by the way, not any corporate bloc (unlike you). If Americans made cars that were as mechanically reliable as their competitors(on average), fuel efficient (on average), affordable (as in not several thousand more than their competitor), and used union labor more often than was convenient or for more than PR purposes, then they can buy their vehicle in good conscience. Hell, even if they are none of these things they can still buy them. What cannot stand, however, are people like you who heap abuse on individuals because they won't support a corporate entity with a religious fervor and quite likely receive an inferior product anyway.

[blue_onyx]

105. Well....

"You have an obligation to yourself as a person paying money for an item to get the best quality for the best price for an item that meets your needs."

You don't have a problem with Walmart, do you? Because Walmart does the same thing. Offers many of the same products that other stores carry but at lower prices.



"If Americans made cars that were as mechanically reliable as their competitors(on average), fuel efficient (on average), affordable (as in not several thousand more than their competitor)"

Care to back this up with facts?

Chevy Malibu: 26 (22/33) starting at $21,825
Toyota Camry: 26 (22/32) starting at $19,395
Honda Accord: 25 (22/31) starting at $21,055



"and used union labor more often than was convenient or for more than PR purposes."

If anyone does this, it's Toyota. They open one union plant in California which people use to defend Toyota against anti-union arguments. Of course, they are now closing that plant now.



"they won't support a corporate entity with a religious fervor"

Yes, they do. People of this site worship Toyota. They overlook that Toyota recently recalled 3.8 million vehicles....even going as far as to blame the consumer for the problem. They overlook that Tacomas are rusting out.


"quite likely receive an inferior product anyway. "

US vehicles being produced today are just as good, if not better than, the foreign competition.

[Mixopterus]

108. Alright

"You don't have a problem with Walmart, do you? Because Walmart does the same thing. Offers many of the same products that other stores carry but at lower prices."

I don't really have a problem with Wal-mart as it's a merely a part of the economic structure of our country. It would be better if we had a more equitable economic system, yes, but I'm not going to target Wal-Mart, which is a symptom, rather than the root of the problem. It would also be hypocritical for me to hate Wal-Mart as I have been known to shop there, as they are the only store open at 2 AM in the area, and for a time I more or less relied on them being open at that time to purchase small items I needed.

And the American models are still more expensive, though by your examples it's only a marginal difference. A more salient example would be the comparison between the Yaris or Corolla and the Focus, which is closer to the choices I am juggling right now.

"If anyone does this, it's Toyota. They open one union plant in California which people use to defend Toyota against anti-union arguments. Of course, they are now closing that plant now."

Indeed, but I'm not defending Toyota. It would be fantastic if they used union labor. From what I understand GM is also quite spotty in it's use of union labor, which makes supporting them more than a little questionable.

"Yes, they do. People of this site worship Toyota. They overlook that Toyota recently recalled 3.8 million vehicles....even going as far as to blame the consumer for the problem. They overlook that Tacomas are rusting out."

Ok, you point me to a Toyota supporter engaging in the same tactics folks like divideandconquer are engaging in and I'll correct them as well. Supporting ANY corporation with a militant fervor is stupid and wrong.

"
US vehicles being produced today are just as good, if not better than, the foreign competition."

Not really, most of the review sites rate all but American luxury cars and some trucks as being either marginally or significantly less mechanically reliable than Japanese competitors such as Honda or Toyota. Obviously, the American corporations have substantially closed the gap since the 80's and 90's, but the reviews combined with very, very bad experiences on the part of my friends and family with American cars have made me extremely cautious. Perhaps I am wrong, but it would take quite a bit of evidence to convince me to purchase a Ford Focus over a Toyota Corolla.

[blue_onyx]

110. US vehicles aren't significantly more expensive

"And the American models are still more expensive, though by your examples it's only a marginal difference. A more salient example would be the comparison between the Yaris or Corolla and the Focus, which is closer to the choices I am juggling right now."

Do you have examples of American models that are significantly more expensive than the foreign model?

Ford Focus: 28 (24/34) starting at $15,995
Toyota Corolla: 29 (26/35) starting at $15,350


"From what I understand GM is also quite spotty in it's use of union labor, which makes supporting them more than a little questionable."

How is GM's support of unions spotty?


"most of the review sites rate all but American luxury cars and some trucks as being either marginally or significantly less mechanically reliable than Japanese competitors such as Honda or Toyota."

Several recent reviews rate the Buick LaCrosse as equal to or better than the Lexus equivalent

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/aug/07/business/fi-neil7

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=156106

[Mixopterus]

112. .

doublepost

[Mixopterus]

113. Odd

Last time I checked for the 09 Focus and 09 Corolla the Focus had a good thousand on the Corolla. I'll concede that point, they are about comparable with the American cars only being marginally more expensive.

"How is GM's support of unions spotty? "

Uh... GM is increasingly shifting operations to Mexico, yes? Enough said.

"Several recent reviews rate the Buick LaCrosse as equal to or better than the Lexus equivalent"

I think Buick and Lexus are categorized as mid-large luxury cars, right? My point was that American luxury cars are rated highly, but take a look at the Ford Focus vs. the Toyota Corolla. While you have adequately demonstrated the prices are comparable, the reviews for the latest Corolla tend to be better than the latest Focus. Can you tell me why I should get a Focus instead of a Corolla?

[blue_onyx]

116. Ok..

"Uh... GM is increasingly shifting operations to Mexico, yes? Enough said."

GM builds a hand full of vehicles in Mexico, such as the Chevy Aveo. No subcompacts, domestic or foreign, are currently made in the US because of the cost. GM will start building the subcompact, the Chevy Spark, in the US soon (as a concession to the unions, not because it makes good business sense).

Most of the vehicles GM builds in Mexico (the Saturn Vue, Chevy Aevo, HHR) are soon to be discontinued. You have proof (links please) that "GM is increasingly shifting operations to Mexico?"


"Can you tell me why I should get a Focus instead of a Corolla?"

I don't have much personal experience with either vehicle. I've been in a Focus and found it to be a nice vehicle. Get whatever vehicle you want. I just don't like it when people push false and negative information about the US automakers. I would get the Focus because it's dependable, better looking than the Corolla, has about the same mpg, has a good price, and is produced in Michigan.

FYI, Ford has the subcompact Fiesta coming out soon. I've heard good things about it. Edmonds picked it over the Honda Fit in a comparison test. Since you're interested in the Yaris, you may want to check out the Fiesta when it comes out.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=157526

[amandabeech]

222. "I really don't have a problem with WalMart."

There are no words, except the perennial DU phrase, "Google is your friend."

[divideandconquer]

125. You're just for the Zaibatsu bloc instead of the American bloc

Once they drive our domestic business out they'll screw us like they screw their own people. Very naive. I suppose you shop at Walmart as well.

[Mixopterus]

146. Are you from the 80's or something?

Anyway, I am not fighting for the Japanese corps, I am fighting for the ability for people to make the best decision without thugs pushing them around because they chose to subsidize a foreign corporation over an American one.

[divideandconquer]

151. No, I'm from the future when many of Toyota proud will be sleeping in them

Good luck competing with slave labor

[divideandconquer]

132. Let's see if you can laugh at this argument?

The Dark Side of the Toyota Prius

By PAUL ABOWD

The National Labor Committee (NLC), a New York-based human rights group, has been investigating working conditions at Toyota Motor Corp., and the labor used to produce its best-selling Prius hybrid cars.

In its 65-page report released in June, NLC includes first-hand testimony of factory conditions in “Toyota City,” outside of Nagoya, Japan — less than 200 miles southwest of Tokyo — where the largest auto company in the world employs some 70,000 people.

The report alleges that Toyota exploits guest workers, mostly shipped in from China and Vietnam. According to the NLC, these workers are “stripped of their passports and often forced to work — including at subcontract plants supplying Toyota — 16 hours a day, seven days a week, while being paid less than half the legal minimum wage.” Workers are forced to live in company dormitories and deported for complaining about poor treatment, the report finds.

Low-wage temporary workers make up one-third of Toyota’s Prius assembly-line workers, mostly in the auto-parts supply chain. They are signed to contracts for periods as short as four months, and are paid only 60 percent of a full-time employee’s wage.

Parts plants run by subcontractors advertise standard, nine-hour, five-day-a-week jobs. But according to the NLC, “the typical shift was 15 to 16.5 hours a day, from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. or 1:00 a.m.”

In 2002, Kenichi Uchino, 30, died while working at the “green” Tsutsumi plant that assembles the Prius. During the 13th hour of a routine 14-hour day, Uchino collapsed on the shop floor of the internationally lauded “sustainable” factory, which uses sulfur-oxide-eating paint and boasts 5 percent emissions reductions. A Japanese court ruled that Uchino’s death was caused by exhaustion from overwork.
----------------------------------------
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3796/the_dark_side_of_the_toyota_prius/

Hey, why open that plant in Mississippi when you can use virtual slave labor back home?

[divideandconquer]

85. Blame foreign car buyers for your dad"s job and race to the bottom

If everyone would only buy UAW cars your dad would still be working.

[Mixopterus]

101. Let me get this straight

We are supposed to buy American UAW cars even if they are utter crap and sabotaged by corporate management, which is the situation that led to the decline of the American automakers in the -first place-. No, sorry, people are not obligated to support a corporate entity with their money.

It was corporate mismanagement that put their dad out of work, not the American citizen.

Oh, I'm still waiting for those three cars BTW.

[conflictgirl]

104. WRONG. It's about profits and greed

Your viewpoint was my assumption for a long time. I wrote papers in college defending the UAW and the Buy American viewpoint and even entered them in competitions (and won, in some cases). I know these arguments inside and out. But it's wrong.

It's not at all about the foreign car buyers, that's a red herring. It may make you feel better to blame American consumers who weren't loyal enough to the companies but the truth is that - once again, as usual - it was the companies that weren't loyal enough to the people. All those years that I bought American cars out of loyalty, despite the fact that I honestly believed it was an inferior product - all it rewarded was GM's corporate management. I bought my foreign car AFTER my dad was forced into early retirement.

If the issue were just about people buying foreign cars, then the American car companies would've had to significantly lower their prices below the foreign car companies to stay competitive. They would've had to do something major to entice buyers away from the foreign car companies, but they didn't. Instead of trying to win back those customers, they believed that the American people would buy their cars forever just because they were made in America. So the American automakers decided that they would just try to do something different to compensate for the loss of profits: their method was to reduce wages by screwing over the American workers who had been loyal to them for decades, whose entire communities were based around the auto plants. First the automakers replaced their well-paid employees with contract workers making $15 an hour. When that wasn't enough for the company to see the profits they wanted, the automakers closed the plants up here entirely, destroying entire communities in the process (most of which have yet to recover) and moved operations to Mexico. Similarly this is why union wages didn't kill GM - even paying US workers minimum wage still would've been more than they're paying the workers in Mexico.

While people like you and those with similar viewpoints are blaming foreign car buyers for the demise of the auto industry, GM's CEO is moving all the jobs to Mexico and saying the company would go bankrupt without a bailout (which they did anyway). Meanwhile the salary of GM's CEO actually increased in 2007, despite the fact that the company hadn't made a profit since 2004. The problem with GM and other automakers was then and still is its corporate management, not the American people.

[divideandconquer]

128. if people would only buy UAW built cars those jobs would come back

Japan artificially keeps it's citizens poorer because of the weak exchange rate their multinational corporations need for conquest sales. Welcome to ten dollar hamburgers. Toyota's hardly a saint and arguably is one the most evil corporations ever, possibly worse than Walmart. Check out the link below about close to slave labor conditions at a Toyota factory.

<http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3796/the_dark_side_of_the_toyota_prius/>

[tabasco]

134. Blaming customers for a failing business

takes a special kind of stupid.

[blue_onyx]

135. It's interesting....

that many Toyota worshipers are blaming the customers for the 3.8 million vehicles that were recalled for faulty floor mats.

[divideandconquer]

160. It's more than the floor mats

The ignition switches and shifters are too complicated.

[divideandconquer]

141. Can't beat slave labor, that's where your thinking leads

Reward Toyota using "guest" workers and open the doors to hell for workers all over the world.

[Touchdown]

44. I've never owned a Toyota, but all my cars needed something.

My first car was a 85' Dodge Charger 2.2. Total POS and general headache. It needed it's 3rd transmission at 90,000 miles. Electrical was never working no matter how many times I had it replaced. Clutch wouldn't engage smoothly, felt like I was driving an old Army Deus & Half. Wheels hubs rattled when driving, window came off tracks, paint oxidized after 3 years, fan belts screetched no matter whether they were new or not. Tape deck was broken when I bought it, and the A/C smoked when turned on. My college car when I had no money and a money pit when I couldn't afford it.

#2 '85 Honda Accord. Same age, and in 1993 when I bought it nothing was broken, or falling off. Ran beautifully until it was totalled in a T-bone. Only major repair... new clutch.

#3 '89 Nissan Pulsar. Fun little car. Alternator needed replaced. Rattling something underneath needed tightening. Not as trouble free as Honda, but good car. It was rear ended and totalled because SUVs can't see small cars.

#4 '95Mazda MX6. Nice drive. Too much torque in the front wheels. Needed numerous repairs. Same car as Ford Probe. Built in Flat Rock Michigan by UAW.Fairly trouble free for 8 years, but repairs were expensive. Sunroof wouldn't close when I traded it in on a...

#5 '01 BMW 325xi. Right out of the bat, wheel assembly went loose... no warranty. Squeaking in climate controls. Entire dash needs dismantling to lube it... $800. Various other small repairs worth over $2000. Now, after I paid it off, one of my windows is off it's track. It scoots down every bump I hit. Driving it? It's the best car I've ever driven, much less owned!

All of these were bought used. Never bought a new one.

[951-Riverside]

51. I guess Toyota forgot to mail JD Power a check. n/t

[divideandconquer]

66. Car companies are notorious for giving "journalists" money

Payola makes the media world go round and round.

[Mixopterus]

52. PROTIP

Scions are not particularly good, and probably not the best metric to compare American and Japanese cars.

I do like your stream of threads hyping American car brands, however. Browbeating and guilting people into subsidizing corporate entities is probably on the same level of stupid as people who flame each other about video game consoles.

[divideandconquer]

63. Scion is what we can expect from Toyota in the future as they are aimed at the buyers of the future

What about supporting union workers and fighting unfair Japanese and Korean trade practices? The media media sure buries all this bad publicity about Japanese cars.

[Mixopterus]

68. Then I'll ask you the same question you dodged weeks ago

Give me three American cars that have comparable gas mileage, good safety ratings, reasonably priced, and are mechanically reliable. I also want you to provide evidence that supports your conclusion.

The argument that the Scion is aimed at the buyers of the future is a dubious one, at best, but we'll get to that after you provide three cars.

EDIT: Comparable to the Toyota Corolla, I mean. I'm soon to be in the market to purchase a new vehicle.

[Statistical]

89. No evidence to support that.

I do think Toyota has slipped though but it has nothing to do with Scion. They simply have had little competition for last 5 years or so combined with consumers buying them on name only, and ability to charge higher margins. That environment makes any company complacent and sloppy.

Toyota likely will have some "bad" (as in worse for Toyota not worse than average) years and it will snap them back into shape.

[Romulox]

73. LOL at yet *another* free-tradin' "Marxist".

You're the colorful contradiction that DU has been waiting for. It won't take long for your unique, contrarian worldview to win us over. Bienvenido!

[Mixopterus]

75. It is funny

I already offered an explanation for my avatar when you offered this original gem several weeks ago, which you failed to read, apparently.

Perhaps you can offer up an argument as to why someone should fund a corporate entity if they cannot provide a product that meets your needs?

EDIT: I'll also add that mocking someone's avatar is not exactly the same as offering a well reasoned argument. All I have from seen from you regarding the American auto makers is ad hominem attacks and threadshitting, while offering very thin or no argumentation as to why the American public should subsidize a corporate entity that has consistently made poor engineering and management choices. If you think it is because we should support unions, then maybe we should just nationalize certain heavy industries and support them directly. As it stands, you are only helping to fund a corporation which just happens to use union labor when it is convenient.

[Romulox]

78. If you didn't need both your choice of automobile and your faux-Marxism to be validated

by strangers on an internet message board, you wouldn't open yourself up to attacks on the obvious contradictions in your half-baked ideology.

"Perhaps you can offer up an argument as to why someone should fund a corporate entity if they cannot provide a product that meets your needs?"

To support Labor. Easy.

"I'll also add that mocking someone's avatar is not exactly the same as offering a well reasoned argument. All I have from seen from you regarding the American auto makers..."

Neither is being a self-contradictory bozo, to be fair. There's enough of your sort around here that addressing you specifically isn't really necessary or productive. It's enough to count you among the others who think it so shocking and clever to denigrate Labor on a putatively "progressive" websight.

And is it worth it to note that you are the one who interjected the nasty (not to mention irrelevant) tone to this thread with the message to which I responded:

"I do like your stream of threads hyping American car brands, however. Browbeating and guilting people into subsidizing corporate entities is probably on the same level of stupid as people who flame each other about video game consoles."

I guess you got the attention you so obviously desire. I still won't remember your name next time. Sorry. :hi:

[Mixopterus]

81. Not sure what you are referring to

Had you read my original message when you brought this up (instead of reverting to a threadshitting mode), you would realize I'm not a Marxist, and do not self-identify as a Marxist (Though I have read and understand his material, Marx himself disliked many self-avowed Marxists in his final years and though his work is a mostly valid interpretation of labor relations, I wouldn't hold him up to be the pinnacle of economic thought), you would realize that I picked the avatar because I resemble a young Marx, being ethnically Jewish, and I find the resemblance amusing. Perhaps Jack Black would be less controversial? I see you have a Kafka avatar, I guess that would also avert trolls who cannot thoroughly argue a position and instead take presumptuous stances based on tiny little images next to the actual content of a post.

Now, let me see...

"To support Labor. Easy."

You mean support a corporate entity who uses union labor when convenient. Can you explain why the individual is beholden to the corporation and should be compelled to purchase products that don't meet their needs and are of a possibly dubious quality? That isn't supporting labor, it's supporting a corporation. A more genuine support of labor would be to wholly nationalize the whole operation and rework their entire engineering and management philosophy, but you may think that it would be a step too far, yes? Either you manage your company in an appropriate manner and make things that work and meet the needs of as many markets as you support, or you perish. That is the essence of capitalism, yes? You live by the sword and you die by the sword, the American citizenry has no obligation to subsidize institutional failure.

I would invite you to think long and hard about who else you are supporting with your purchase of an American automobile, which may arguably not meet your needs. It's more than organized labor, and a greater share at that.

"
Neither is being a self-contradictory bozo, to be fair. There's enough of your sort around here that addressing you specifically isn't really necessary or productive. It's enough to count you among the others who think it so shocking and clever to denigrate Labor on a putatively "progressive" websight."

Self-contradictory? Hardly, I have already explained my avatar (of all things) twice to you: the argumentative and presumptuous threadshitter. If you had already read my statements regarding the American automakers, you would realize I place the blame squarely at the feet of corporate management for their poor decisions and engineering direction. I guess reading posts is not necessarily required on a message board?

And yes, browbeating and guilting people into buying American automobiles regardless of quality and need IS stupid, I'm sorry to say. It's about as stupid as abusing people for not purchasing an XBox360 and instead opting for a Playstation 3. Union concerns aside, you are essentially harassing people for not wanting to subsidize your preferred corporate bloc.

Here, I'll concede something to sooth your butthurt: I'll change my avatar to Kafka so you are no longer confounded that a non-Marxist has Karl Marx as an avatar. Perhaps then you can offer criticisms like my posts are not in German, I'm not a malformed pariah beast, or I don't have enough social critique regarding crushing bureaucracy in my posts.

[Vehl]

109. Well said!

I've listened to many a corporate shill trying to turn this issue of failing US automakers(almost always due to bad corporate leadership/decisions/complacency )into a labor issue. The issue, as you rightly pointed out, is about incompetent leadership. I do not intend to shore up CEO's with my hard earned money so they can have wage INCREASES while the companies they run are failing/running at a loss.

[divideandconquer]

138. It's also rewarding labor hating REPUBLICANS!

It's also economic policy rewarding nations that exploit their home workers through weak currency, slavelike conditions for "guest" workers, heavy subsidies for domestic manufacturing aimed at export or have high entry barriers to imports.

[Romulox]

172. What in the world does this comment have to do with Scion's quality?

:hi: :silly:

[Name removed]

194. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Vehl]

229. Should all the posts be directly pertinent to the topic?

I agreed with what the poster said, hence i replied. Furthermore his reply is but a reply to some of other "non scion related" comments certain people posted. So surely why pick my post out when there are many non-topic related posts above mine?

especially this post by you
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6803627&mesg_id=6808049

What has THAT got anything to do with the Scion :)
a clear case of the pot calling the kettle black huh

:silly: :silly:

[Romulox]

170. It's fun to argue strawmen points, because you have them all worked out ahead of time!

You mean support a corporate entity who uses union labor when convenient.

No, I mean exactly what I said. To support organized Labor (which, if the abstraction confuses you, means working men and women.)

Can you explain why the individual is beholden to the corporation and should be compelled to purchase products that don't meet their needs and are of a possibly dubious quality?

No, because that is an argument that originated in your own head. It's also an argument that assumes it central argument as its premise--i.e. that UAW produced cars are of inferior quality. Obviously this is a ridiculous argument to make in context of the OP.

That isn't supporting labor, it's supporting a corporation.

This is tripe. Buying the products US workers make is supporting their lifestyles. Buying products made in non-union shops in "Right to Work" states likewise supports that philosophy.

A more genuine support of labor would be to wholly nationalize the whole operation and rework their entire engineering and management philosophy, but you may think that it would be a step too far, yes?

What is the basis of your assumption? This is more argument with yourself. And, moreover, the Obama administration is at present in control of General Motors. How in the world have you missed this? It's been in all the papers. :hi:

Either you manage your company in an appropriate manner and make things that work and meet the needs of as many markets as you support, or you perish. That is the essence of capitalism, yes? You live by the sword and you die by the sword, the American citizenry has no obligation to subsidize institutional failure.

Your words ring entirely hollow in the context of a multi-trillion dollar bailout to the financial sector. Your "free markets" are nothing but a Randian fantasy at this point. :silly:

Now, can you explain to me why you have no responsibility to your fellow Americans again, but this time, without all the deflection and straw men? :rofl:

[Mixopterus]

193. Right

"No, I mean exactly what I said. To support organized Labor (which, if the abstraction confuses you, means working men and women.)"

The method of which entails purchasing a product from a corporation, hence funding them. I don't find the argument of supporting labor via propping up a corporation very compelling, to be honest, especially when the corporation is producing a vehicle of a possibly dubious quality.

"No, because that is an argument that originated in your own head. It's also an argument that assumes it central argument as its premise--i.e. that UAW produced cars are of inferior quality. Obviously this is a ridiculous argument to make in context of the OP."

Yet American vehicles, with the exception of luxury brands, consistently score lower on most automobile reviews sites, ESPECIALLY in the area of electronics and to some extent broader mechanical issues. This has nothing to do with unions, which is a point you may have missed, but rather corporate mismanagement. Perhaps you can point a post where I stated the problem was with unions, because I didn't. Time and time again I have stated it is the fault of the corporations.

"This is tripe. Buying the products US workers make is supporting their lifestyles. Buying products made in non-union shops in "Right to Work" states likewise supports that philosophy."

No, you are supporting a corporation, end of story. Maybe if the structure of the manufacturer was not a corporate one and more in line with something that directly profited the worker you would have a point, but it isn't that way. It's a corporation.

"What is the basis of your assumption? This is more argument with yourself. And, moreover, the Obama administration is at present in control of General Motors. How in the world have you missed this? It's been in all the papers. :hi:"

That is an important distinction because then a purchase would directly support the workers instead of going into the exec's pockets. I would also hardly call the current situation an effort at nationalization, the corporate structure is more or less intact and I don't see any great efforts to change how the company works.



"Your words ring entirely hollow in the context of a multi-trillion dollar bailout to the financial sector. Your "free markets" are nothing but a Randian fantasy at this point. "

Wait, so I was originally a Marxist and now I am an Objectivist? I think you need to make up your mind about the ideological values that you are imposing on me. Furthermore, I don't think you are being fair and charitable to my position, with your argumentation, even now, being quite thin.

And yes, an ACTUAL nationalization would be nice, but it doesn't look like one. Seems more the same corporate welfare that was gifted to the banks. Where is the hefty restructuring and a complete change in engineering philosophy? Seems it's just business as usual to me.



"Now, can you explain to me why you have no responsibility to your fellow Americans again, but this time, without all the deflection and straw men? "

Hey, I can frame things in ways that support my position too!: Why do you want to encourage corporate welfare and bind people to corporations.

[Romulox]

200. Japanese cars are also produced, marketed and sold by corporations.

So where is the distinction you are struggling for? :silly:

"Wait, so I was originally a Marxist and now I am an Objectivist?"

No, I called you a free-tradin' Faux-Marxist and self-contradictory; a phoney. Were you really confused about that? :eyes:

"I think you need to make up your mind about the ideological values that you are imposing on me."

LOLs. And you need to read more carefully before producing blocks and blocks of text. At any rate, none of this has a thing to do with the OP at this point. It's about you, and you're simply not that interesting.

[Mixopterus]

203. Ha

But I'm not the one saying that you should purchase goods from a Japanese company or else face my displeasure, I frankly could not care about what automobile someone purchases.

"
No, I called you a free-tradin' Faux-Marxist and self-contradictory; a phoney. Were you really confused about that? :eyes:"

Which was a gross misrepresentation of my economic stance, I'm closer to an advocate of a mixed economy and am open to "futurist" solutions. So yes, I found your imposition a little confusing, I am equally sure any third party would find your commentary on a tiny avatar as a representation of the whole of an economic position equally confusing and perhaps a little silly.

I also think you need to gracefully back out of the discussion, as you have been clearly incapable of thoroughly arguing your position without resorting to nonsense posts like this in this and other subthreads. FWIW I think your heart is in the right place, you are just being hyper aggressive in your approach and I would tend to agree with your position if the argument included a restructuring of automobile manufacturers instead of just handing them money to do the same old stuff.

[Romulox]

204. This is a thread about Scion. Not your personal blog. Enough. nt

[Mixopterus]

211. IIRC

You started the stuff on me, so go figure :D?

[Romulox]

173. PS I see your bizarre rant downthread was deleted. You feeling hungry at all?

:rofl:

[JVS]

74. +1000

[DainBramaged]

56. I think I'll let this thread simmer a bit more, it needs to be well done......

:rofl:

[aikoaiko]

60. I guess I got lucky with my Scion Xb - all I've done in 5+ yrs is change the oil and rotate tires.

:shrug:

eta: Oh yeah, I forgot, Toyota replaced all four of my tires last year when the treads got low.

[distantearlywarning]

61. Scion XB owner here, 4 years, 50K miles so far

No problems to speak of whatsoever. Still runs great, gets good gas mileage, love the car.

[divideandconquer]

62. I just drove a 2005 xB Series2 tonite, it make a Dodge Caliber look like an Mercedes

Rough ride, sluggish automatic, lot of buzzes and rattles, too cheaply designed to put the instrument cluster on the driver side. And the 2005 is supposed to be better than the 2nd generation? If an American company made a junkbox like this they be crucified.

[distantearlywarning]

119. Ok. To each his own I guess.

:shrug:

[amandabeech]

223. Drove the Xb as a rental. Decided NOT to get one.

More buzzes and rattles than my Dad's former 1972 Datsun pickup. In a pickup from that era, you expect it. Not from a Toyota, according to the Toyota shills here.

[FreeState]

136. I have a 2004 scion xb - not 1 problem so far n/t

[LeftyMom]

67. Scion is marketed to younger people and a lot of them modify and/or race them.

They're also loaded to the gills with customizable electronic gizmos, so I'm curious to know how many of those disproportionately high "problems" involved the ipod integration or some other minor issue that really has nothing to do with reliability. Or service calls to add extra features.

[rollingrock]

76. Hmmm....Consumer Reports seems to say something much different about Scion

Who to believe?
---------------


Scion Tops Consumer Reports 2009 Reliability List, Chrysler Falters


In its yearly report on automobile reliability, Consumer Reports has released its 2009 model calculations. Asian automakers dominated the top results, Chrysler suffered a sharp decline and Ford overshadowed its Detroit rivals. Toyota’s Scion xD was named as the most reliable car, followed closely by Honda Motor Co.’s Acura and Honda Toyota and its luxury brand, Lexus, were next.

Asian manufacturers were represented in the magazine’s top-10 positions, with Ford’s Lincoln the top American brand overall in 11th position.

The Chrysler Sebring was Consumer Reports’ worst-rated 2009 car.

The Consumer Reports study is compilation of more than 1.4 million readers’ responses this spring to vehicles from previous years. The results are used to predict reliability for 2009 models

Here are top two best and worst cars (if available) from each category in the Consumer Reports' reliability issue, available on newsstands Nov. 11.

Small
Car
Best: Scion xD, Mini Cooper Clubman
Worst: Nissan Versa (sedan), (no second pick)

Family Car
Best: Toyota Prius, Kia Optima
Worst: Dodge Avenger, Chrysler Sebring (V-6)

Sporty Car, Coupes & Convertibles
Best: Lexus SC, Volvo C30
Worst: Chrysler Sebring (convertible), Saturn Sky

Upscale/Luxury Car
Best: Infinity M35 (rear-wheel drive), Lexus IS250
Worst: Cadillac STS (V-8), Mercedes-Benz E-Class (V-8)
Wagons & Minivan
Best: Toyota Matrix, Scion xB
Worst: Chrysler Town & Country, Dodge Grand Caravan

Small SUV
Best: Honda Element, Toyota FJ Cruiser
Worst: Land Rover LR2, Saturn Vue (V-6, all-wheel drive)

Midsized SUV
Best: Honda Pilot (2008), Lexus RX400h (hybrid)
Worst: Land Rover Range Rover, Volkswagen Touareg
Large SUV
Best: Toyota Sequoia, (no second pick)
Worst: Mercedes-Benz GL-Class (V-8), Mercedes-Benz GL-Class (turbodiesel)

Pickup Trucks
Best: Toyota Tundra (V-6), Honda Ridgeline
Worst: Ford F-250 (turbodiesel), Dodge Dakota (four-wheel drive)



www.theweeklydriver.com/articles/1310/1/Scion-Tops-Consumer-Reports-2009-Reliability-List-Chrysler-Falters/Page1.html

[Romulox]

79. Doesn't Consumer's Reports use self-selected reader surveys?

In addition, they automatically recommend certain models without testing them?

Neither practice is really a valid way of surveying quality. :shrug:

[Mixopterus]

82. J.D Power does the same thing

Regarding consumer surveys, most places do.

[quiller4]

215. It does more than that. Power gets sales and service records from

dealerships and examines that data, too.

[rollingrock]

98. Surveys

if they are surveying the owners of domestic brands as well as foreign brands, why wouldn't it be an indicator of quality?

[Romulox]

167. All valid statistical models are based on RANDOM (not *self-selected*) surveys

You keyed in on the wrong word "survey"--the key issue is that they are self-selected (i.e. in no way random.)

[rollingrock]

216. Who said anything about random?

again, if they are surveying (self-selected or not) the owners of BOTH foreign and domestic brand vehicles, why wouldn't it be an indicator of quality?

[Romulox]

230. If you don't understand that statistical validity requires a random sample, I can't teach you.

This is a matter of basic mathematics.

[Codeine]

87. Consumer Reports is yuppy bullshit

that merely exists to reinforce the worldview of its faux-liberal readership.

[divideandconquer]

90. Here's a deconstruction of Consumer Reports questionable methods

Take it with a grain of salt but I've personally known many japanese car owners who won't admit their cars have troubles.

<http://www.allpar.com/cr.html>

[divideandconquer]

154. Leave me tell you a couple of funny stories about Consumer Reports

i know a guy just bought a 2000ish Toyota Avalon and was bragging how it was the best car he ever had and Consumer Reports says, blah, blah, blah. The car was sitting there idling while he said all this and blue oil smoke was pouring out the exhaust in a big cloud. A month later he was praising Toyota for giving him a break by cutting the cost of a new engine for his sludgemobile back to $5000!

A coworker had bought several Chrysler minivans and had minor problems and on the advice of Consumer Reports bought one of the first larger Honda Odesseys. A few months passed and she showed up at work in an Accord she said the dealership was letting her try out. A week later, she had her van back but a couple of days later the Accord was back, it turned out the transmission was broker a second time on the Honda. Consumer Reports had recommended this van with no track record on the actual vehicle, just because it was a Honda.

Conversely all these Consumer Reports believers think all these Jeeps in our family should be constantly broke and they never are except for batteries. My niece just traded her 150k miles bulletproof Grand Cherokee for a Dodge Avenger under cash for clunkers. I guess the Consumer Reports worshipping neighbors will have a deathwatch on this car as well.

People would rather believe Consumer Reports rather than their own lying eyes.

[NoGOPZone]

158. Funny story indeed

Since Consumer Reports does not recommend vehicles on which they have no track record or testing, no matter how many times that canard gets posted on this website.

Regarding the allpar article which you and the other CR detractors seem to constantly refer to, here and elsewhere, I'll say this about Zatz. He's managed to self promote his way into a quite a cult following.

[Romulox]

176. That's a subtle spin. But CR DOES recommend cars they haven't tested. Let's be clear!

"Since Consumer Reports does not recommend vehicles on which they have no track record or testing"

Consumer Reports recommends cars that they have not tested, which I suspect is what you mean by "track record". But Consumer Reports does indeed recommend vehicles they have not tested.

Since we're clearing up canards and all... :hi:

[NoGOPZone]

180. You want to be clear? Then document your twice repeated statement that

CR recommends vehicles they haven't tested.

From Consumer Reports Buying Guide.

Models indicated are recommended by consumer reports. These are models that have performed well in Consumer Reports TESTING, have average or better reliability according to our survey, and performed adequately in crash or rollover tests.

Emphasis added.

Interesting way you have of clearing up canards

On edit: Note that the phrase 'track record' first appeared in the post to which I replied.

[blue_onyx]

182. Here....

"Consumer Reports magazine reported today that the quality of cars made by Toyota, long the benchmark for reliability among automotive brands, had slipped so much that the organization no longer will automatically recommend them."

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/SavingandDebt/Advice/ToyotaIsSlippingConsumerReportsSays.aspx

Automatically recommending vehicles because they performed well in the past. Yep, that sounds fair and reliable.

[NoGOPZone]

183. I recommend you search for CR original press release on the subject

and not rely on a journalist's interpretation. The text of the statement was something like this.

"Consumer Reports will no longer recommend new or redesigned Toyota-built models without specific reliability data on a design."

Models were never recommended without testing. Toyota that tested well were assumed reliable until survey data came in. My 2005 Buying Guide shows that neither the Camry Solara nor the Tacoma was recommended, and neither had been tested, which impeaches your statement that vehicles were automatically recommended because they performed well in the past.

[blue_onyx]

184. Maybe you should search for it

It's your argument. I backed mine up.

"Typically, Consumer Reports will recommend a vehicle only if it has at least one year of reliability data. New and redesigned Toyota models had been exempted from that standard because of the company's record. The magazine said today it no longer will recommend any new or redesigned Toyota-built models without reliability data on a specific design."

How can you possible defend CR recommending "new or redesigned Toyota-built models without reliability data on a specific design."

[NoGOPZone]

187. You might try reading my other posts

I've already cited Consumer Reports itself on their criteria for recommending vehicles. It must have done well in CR TESTING, it must have done at least adequately in crash testing, and it must have at least average in the reliability survey.

Interestingly enough, your quoted text reinforces my point. There is nothing in it that states that any vehicle can be recommended that hasn't been tested.


"How can you possible defend CR recommending "new or redesigned Toyota-built models without reliability data on a specific design."

Are you changing your argument now? Whether or not Toyota should have gotten a pass on reliability data is a different issue than whether or not they were recommended without vehicle testing. Simply because Toyota was, fairly or not, given a pass on one criteria does not prove they were given a pass on all three.

[blue_onyx]

197. You are making no sense

"Interestingly enough, your quoted text reinforces my point. There is nothing in it that states that any vehicle can be recommended that hasn't been tested."

No, it doesn't. Not testing new models because the previous version of those models were tested is not reliable data. Just because they have PAST data on the Corolla doesn't mean that same data accurately reflects this year Corolla.


"Are you changing your argument now?"

How is that changing the argument? You just can't back up your own argument so you accusing me of changing the subject.

[NoGOPZone]

201. Maybe you're simply not following along

I've already cited CR's three criteria for earning a recommendation. Toyota was given a pass on the reliability part, until and unless a model proved unreliable. Whether or not that is fair is not what I'm debating. The issue is that they never earned a pass on all three.

I take issue with the idea that Toyota vehicles earned automatic recommendations simply because of their brand name, which is what the article you linked implies. A vehicle still needed to test well by CR and crash test agencies to earn a recommendation.

[blue_onyx]

205. Giving them a pass on ANYTHING.....

Taints their recommendations. The same standards should be applied to every vehicle. Just because a vehicles performed well in the past doesn't mean it will perform well now. People should know about this double standard before putting too much faith in Consumer Reports rating.

[Romulox]

188. Your own quote disproves your argument.

"Consumer Reports will no longer recommend new or redesigned Toyota-built models without specific reliability data on a design." (emphasis mine)

This statement is a logical nonsense unless Consumer Reports was indeed "recommend(ing) new or redesigned Toyota-built models without specific reliability data on a design" :hi:

[NoGOPZone]

190. delete, misplace again.

[NoGOPZone]

191. Try to follow along

the argument is not whether or not they recommended new or designed Toyota models without reliability data. It's whether or not they recommended models without TESTING, as in your statement to the effect that, 'let's be clear, CR DOES recommend vehicles they haven't tested'. Unless of course, you are moving the goalposts. ;-)

[Romulox]

195. Yours is a distinction without a difference.

"Reliability data" is acquired through some peer reviewable process--i.e. "testing".

Even if you quibble with regard to the word "testing", however, you've admitted that Consumer Reports has made a practice of recommending a car without any reliability data.

In other words, your defense is as damning as the charge.

[NoGOPZone]

196. HUGE goalpost move.

You started by saying they recommended cars without testing. Now you appear to be abandoning that argument.

[Romulox]

198. "CR does recommend cars they haven't tested" was my claim. You confirmed it.

I wasn't talking about a road test. I was talking about reliability testing. That was never ambiguous. :hi:

[NoGOPZone]

199. Nice exit!

Never ambiguous, huh? I guess some people would expand the definition of 'testing' to include reliability surveys. ;-)

[Romulox]

202. I haven't gone anywhere. CR recommends cars (for RELIABILITY) without testing them.

That was always my claim, and remains my claim. It appears CR has admitted fault and reformed the practice, so even the organization itself won't defend the practice. :hi:

"I guess some people would expand the definition of 'testing' to include reliability surveys."

Nobody relies on CR for road reviews. Please quit playing silly games.

[NoGOPZone]

207. Here's a offer

Don't make false or at least ambiguous statements, and I'll stop playing 'silly games'. I guess some people would expand the definition of that phrase to include demanding accountability. At the very least, at least ONE person would ;-)

[Romulox]

208. CR does recommend cars (for RELIABILITY) without testing them.

Or they have in the past, and have promised to desist from the practice. You have admitted this in this very subthread, so it's a bit baffling that this argument goes on, but there's face to be saved, so... :shrug:

[NoGOPZone]

210. Of course I have

I simply never admitted they recommended vehicles without testing them, because I never understood that testing vehicles meant reliability surveys instead of road tests. Maybe JD Power will refer to their services as tests and not surveys hencefort. }(

[Romulox]

213. For anyone skimming: this person's argument rests on whether one "tests" for reliability or not

:eyes:

[Romulox]

186. You got your documentation, now you are discounting it and demanding that you be proven wrong.

/goalposts MOVED! :silly:

[NoGOPZone]

192. What I got was a journalist's impression of a press release.

I see nothing from CR itself that says they automatically recommended Toyota vehicles. I've already cited CR itself for their procedure on recommending vehicles. You've decided to ignore that. I've also noted two Toyota vehicles from the time period that were not recommended. You've decide to ignore that too. I guess CR only automatically recommends CERTAIN Toyota vehicles.

[blue_onyx]

206. You seem to be

writing off this article as somehow biased without anything to prove that. Also, where have you "cited CR itself for their procedure on recommending vehicles." I didn't notice any link in your previous posts.

[NoGOPZone]

209. Post 180

references the CR Buying Guide, which describes the criteria for earning a recommended vehicle designation. I'll see if I can provide a link, but a lot of what CR has online requires a subscription. However, in their annual auto issue as well as the buying guide, they describe the procedure, so if you're still not convinced you might want to see if you can find a copy.

I'm not trying to imply that the link is biased, simply that it oversimplifies, whether through laziness, simplicity or space considerations. Toyota did get a pass on reliability, but their vehicles were never recommended simply for being Toyotas. If they were, I would expect every model every year to be recommended.

[NoGOPZone]

189. delete, misplaced

[elleng]

86. Thats too bad;

daughter has one. But I've got '93 hand me down Camry wagon from folks. Only problems with worn tires!

[4_TN_TITANS]

91. Our 2006 Scion w/ 50,000+ miles

has been perfect. Not one single issue or complaint. We bought it in anticipation of the 2007/2008 gas gouging and it has saved us a bundle.

Now that I've said that, watch the wheels fall off of it tomorrow!

edit to add: our other car is a 1994 Accord, still runs like a top.

[divideandconquer]

96. How about a 446k miles Dodge Neon

These cars are also great race cars.
<http://www.allpar.com/cotm/2009/neon.html>

[Tommy_Carcetti]

100. All I know is that they are ugly as sin....

....and unless one of them got 60+ mpg, I wouldn't dream of buying one.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[proud2BlibKansan]

111. I love my Scion

It is 4 years old now and still gets great mileage. It's been very economical.

[peallens]

115. JDP is a scam

I used to work in the industry. JD Power is a scam and does not reflect quality. Dealers do everything possible to fix the results with perfect scores. If they think the customer is pissed at them, they purposely put the wrong address on the survey.

Initial quality has nothing to do with long term repairs/reliability. Who cares about the first 15 to 90 days. We own cars for YEARS. You can score perfect after 90 days, but if the transmission blows up a week after the warranty expires, you're still screwed.

Most Merican kaas are much better nowadays, but many are still POS. Many furrin kaas are crap too.

[izzybeans]

118. I love my Scion Xd. After driving Chevy's for years I bought a corolla and now the Xd.

Had the Corolla 200,000 miles.

My chevy S-10 sounded like a lawn mower and my cavalier lasted me 3 years.

Car wars are funny. The automotive industry sold us down river long ago. Ford is huge in China.

[DainBramaged]

123. My two cents

DU people who say "Mine has been wonderful, I love mine, la la " are not the majority here. The Scion line is aging badly, it is the previous generation Corolla, and Toyota dealers (one I know quite well) feel that Toyota will be dropping the line because sales have nosedived so badly. Having driven 3 (one pie wagon, 2 XC) I personally don't find them any better or worse than anything out there, but for a Toyota, they are cheaply made. Drive one through a car wash and listen to the roof ripple and sing when the air blast passes over. NO insulation on the underside of the hood. the doors seem flimsy, and they aren't bought by older people mostly young adults, who may have less patience with 'defects' than an older person would ("I heard a squeak, therefore something is wrong. I'd trust JD power before Consumer Distorts, but that's just me. Overall, from reading industry statistics, it appears the Scions are trading at a much faster rate than other Toyota's,meaning owners are moving up much quicker than expected to other Toyota's or Honda's.


Just my two cents.

[Lisa0825]

126. It's only a year old, but I love my Scion Xd. I haven't had so much as a burnt out bulb yet.

It's the first car I have had that I have not had one single problem with, no matter how small... a knob on the stereo, for example.

I can also say it is the first car I have had that there is NOTHING that annoys me about it. Nothing that doesn't work as good now as on day 1, nothing I didn't try out on the test drive that took me by surprise later... There is absolutely nothing about this car that I do not like.

I know it is still new, but every other car I have had has disappointed me in some (at least) small way during the first year. The honeymoon ain't over yet!

[madville]

127. Jeep and Scion scored the same with Kia ahead of both

Jeeps have always been maintenance hogs, people expect that, Kia actually beat them both. Pretty smart on Toyota's part putting the cheaply made econo-boxes in their own separate brand, they know how to manipulate the systems. The way I read it Jaguar and Buick were the only ones ahead of Toyota and Lexus, so they are still the cream of the crop. I'm trying to figure out how Chrysler was slightly above average while Dodge and Jeep were significantly below average, they all use the same technology.

[divideandconquer]

131. Chrysler has less cheap cars, Jeeps are more complicated and Dodges more entry level

So when Chrysler makes Dodge the cheap car they're incompetent, but when Toyota does the same thing with Scion, they're brilliant? This is exactly the disconnect I'm talking about!

[madville]

133. Completely different

Chrysler and Dodge are built on the same platforms using the same drive trains, maybe it's the Dodge truck line dragging Dodge cars down since that is unique to Dodge. The Scions are different from Toyota and Lexus in just about every way, it's more understandable they didn't want the lower quality cars dragging their major brands down.

I would believe Toyota had motive to keep things separate since they make some of the best, trouble free vehicles on the market just like the article says and that is smart. I wouldn't give that much credit to Chrysler when their top of the line offering is slightly above average and their other two major brands are down near the bottom.

[divideandconquer]

137. Most Scions are built on the Yaris or Corolla platforms using regular Toyota drivetrains

<http://www.autozine.org/html/Toyota/Yaris.html>
<http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070509/FREE/70508004/1024/latestnews>

[madville]

144. You are right and those differ from most other Toyotas

Of course the Yaris and Corolla are at the bottom of quality in Toyota's line up so that makes sense.

[mkultra]

129. Isnt J.D. Powers a for profit research company that takes cash to do studies?

[lonestarnot]

140. Pug organization, somewhere along the lines of Chamber of Commerce.

[divideandconquer]

142. So that's why all the Republicans lined up behind anti union Japanese automakers?

:crazy: JD Power told them?

[lonestarnot]

143. I do not give a fuck who JD Powers told what, I never read anything coming from anything JD Powers.

And I don't look at pug lines, that would make me :puke:

[mkultra]

145. wiki says they take money from car makers to do surveys

Seems pretty odd to me.

[lonestarnot]

147. Wiki your only source? Try living with their shit.

[mkultra]

153. what does "living with their shit" mean?

wiki is an excellent source. just as good as any encyclopedia.

[lonestarnot]

157. So you read the entry re J D Powers, but even from that you could smell the smell.

[mkultra]

159. I see. Yes, it just seems fishy

the article seemed like an attempt be as fair as possible to a bullshit entity.

[lonestarnot]

161. When one is in the business of giving a stamp of approval to businesses, only certain businesses,

pugs will be pugs.

[Romulox]

164. Errr, logic problem: Toyota participates in the JD Powers program, too.

:shrug:

[lonestarnot]

169. That's their problem.

:shrug: Money talks bullshit walks.

[Romulox]

174. Right. But it blows a hole in your argument.

JD Powers does not have a profit motive to favor one of its members over another.

"Money talks bullshit walks."

Except that Toyota gives JD Powers money, as well. :hi:

[lonestarnot]

224. And must be a bunch too. And is JD Powers a business or is it not? And how are they paid?

Case closed. No profit motive indeed, are you nuts?

[Romulox]

231. You make no sense. JD Powers gets money from Toyota, too.

"No profit motive indeed, are you nuts?"

It has no profit motive to favor one of its members over another. Toyota participates in the JD Powers program. Ergo, JD Powers has no profit motive (outside of an illicit bribe) to favor any automaker over Toyota.

[Romulox]

165. "Wiki" isn't a source, any more than "the internet" is...

"A wiki is a website that uses wiki software, allowing the easy<1> creation and editing of any number of interlinked Web pages, using a simplified markup language or a WYSIWYG text editor, within the browser."

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

:eyes:

[divideandconquer]

150. Do you believe in search engines?

Just Google "toyota engine sludge", "toyota truck frames rust", "toyota class action lawsuits"

[lonestarnot]

162. Just smell JD Powers.

:puke:

[divideandconquer]

166. Do your own research, there are plenty of dissatisfied customers all over the internet

[lonestarnot]

168. I'm not dissatisfied with mine, but my aim here is at PugPowers

[divideandconquer]

175. What's your proof JD Power is Republican?

I know for sure the republicans love the japanese carmakers, Rush limbaugh, Bitch Mcconnell, Dickhead Shelby, tell me so.

[quiller4]

218. JP Powers is owned by McGraw Hill. It does contract to do

market research for firms as well as conduct its own studies.

[deoxyribonuclease]

130. I drive a 2004 Scion xA

Not problems yet, but I've only driven about 38k miles. The report is a big disturbing. I hope the problems are attributed to the younger crowd buying this vehicle who may be more prone to 'abusing' it or forget about proper maintenance.

[lonestarnot]

139. Ugh I think JD Powers blows.

[lonestarnot]

148. | Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours

[divideandconquer]

149. A lot of these Toyota proud people are going to be living in them in the near future!

The American middle class is trading it's manufacturing and union heritage for some beads, blankets and empty libertarian consumerist pie in the sky.

[lonestarnot]

156. My post to this thread was more about J D Powers than Toyota, but

America did that long ago in the car industry.

[divideandconquer]

163. Your logic about JD Powers is faulty

Why wouldn't the worse companies pay for even higher rankings? Toyota mostly came out good but Chrysler did beat them in minivans. Why didn't Toyota pay to win every category or Chrysler pay to win more. Why didn't the high profit Germans not buy every category as they did worse then American cars?

[lonestarnot]

171. SNAFU

Edumacate yourself. Last kick.

[snooper2]

155. Only way to make a Scion any good is pull the engine..

Set it up for rear wheel drive and drop a NASCAR V8 in it :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Id5jRqQhq0c

[dembotoz]

181. too bad- I really want one of those.....

shoebox on wheels
i love it