Bookmarking Auto on Info pagesHome or Site Layout or Site Map or Site Index or Quick Jumps or Search Engine Directory or The Mart or The LinksCautionary Remarks

Links to the Mart		Links to the Mart
Equipping the Expedition Dressing Up for the Trip		Earrings for an Evening Out Books Purchased by Visitors
Visitor support makes this site possible. Please shop at Amazon.com via Auto on Info. Thank you.

by Site Manager

1.      Toyotas Manufactured in North America  

While the benchmarks of quality against which all other vehicles are compared on this site are those set by the products of Toyota Motor Corporation, I continue to encounter anecdotal evidence that suggests a rather sizable  difference between Toyota motor vehicles made in North America and those made in Japan. These anecdotes include alleged repairs, repair frequencies, criticisms, and reservations regarding made in North America Toyotas which I have never heard attached to made in Japan Toyotas. However, (1) I still have no hard data that such a difference exists, (2) if you call Toyota's U.S. national customer service center, you may be able to get the representative to reassure you that North American suppliers must meet Toyota standards, (3) all adverse remarks to date (September 22, 2001) concern Toyota motor vehicles that were made in North America prior to 1993, (4) many of the persons who have expressed complaints with their North-American-made Toyota still judge it to be a remarkable vehicle relative to other North-American-made vehicles they have owned, and (5) many who have expressed such complaints have admitted that their complaints are relative to Toyota's vaulted reputation. In any case, it seems prudent for a consumer with made-in-Japan Toyota experiences to purchase a made-in-Japan Toyota or Lexus.

Update: A front page article in the August 4, 2004, issue of the Wall Street Journal reports that Toyota Production System masters - steeped in the philosophy of endless continuous improvement, loyalty, dedication to task, and attention to detail - are in very short supply in its North American manufacturing  plants, due to a very rapidly growing global demand for Toyota products. It notes that by one early ownership complaint survey, the Toyota Camry fell from 1st place (fewest complaints) among North American models in 2000 to 8th place in 2004. This suggests - maybe, in combination with prudence, demands - that those with made-in-Japan Toyota product experiences best stick with made-in-Japan Toyota products. (See AOI August 2004 article "TPS Masters in Short Supply in Toyota's North American Manufacturing Plants, Reports WSJ.")

Further Update: Toyota's North American technical center is reported to have been responsible for developing the Camry sedan, the Solara coupe, the Avalon sedan, and the Sienna minivan for the North American market. With regard to the Camry, the Wall Street Journal, in an August 4, 2004, front page article, reported that the model fell from first place in its 2001 segment to eighth place in its 2004 segment, in the J.D. Power initial quality survey results. Furthermore, the average of the 1995-1999 Reliability Percentrank averages for these four models is .78, while the same average for the remainder of the Toyota line is .90.

Also, Toyota plans to expand its North American development and engineering activities for made-in-North America products. (See AOI August 2004 article "Toyota Plans to Expand Its Michigan Development and Engineering Activities: Bad News for the North American Consumer?")

2.      The Saturn SL Sedan, SW Wagon 

On page 15 of the 2001 Auto Review is discussed the credibility of the anomalous jump in the Reliability Index Value for the Saturn SL Sedan, SW Wagon. Here we present more data casting doubt on the credibility of the Reliability Index Values of this model after this anomalous jump. First, we define Reliability Index Values for individual years. We perform the same count as set forth in the Methodology page; however, we do it for a single year rather than a pair of years. To keep the same range in the Reliability Index Values, from -1 to +1, we divide by 12, rather than 24, as the number of trouble spots for 1 year is half that for 2 years. Second, we observe that the left most column of the eight columns in a Consumer Reports reliability table gives the trouble spot values for vehicles that are roughly 7-8 years old, the actual age range depending upon when Consumer Reports stopped accepting responses to its questionnaire and when the model year began and ended. We use this column to define RIV(7-8) to be the Reliability Index Value of a model year computed using this left most column. Similarly, RIV(6-7) and RIV(5-6) are defined using the second from left and third from left columns, respectively. Third we present the three charts that appear below.

 

These charts present several aspects that cast doubt on the last two Reliability Index Values of the Saturn SL Sedan, SW Wagon in Table I and the last two Reliability Index Averages for the Saturn Line in Table I and Table II. First, from Chart I we see the anomalous jump in reliability from the 1991 model to the 1992 model.. Second, from Charts I and II we see the anomalous improvement in reliability for the 1992 model from when the 1992 vehicles were 6-7 years old to when they were 7-8 years old. Third, if we use the graphical depictions of the RIVs for the 1991 model found in Charts I, II and III and the two graphical depictions of the RIVs for the 1992 model found in Charts II and III as reference, we see no basis for anticipating the RIV(7-8) for the 1992 model depicted in the Chart I. Fourth, if we use the graphical depictions of the RIV(5-6)s for model years 1991, 1992 and 1993 and the RIV(6-7)s for models years 1991 and 1992 as reference, we see no basis for anticipating the RIV(6-7) for model year 1993 and the sizable jump in the RIV(6-7) from model year 1992 to model year 1993. Fifth, both the larger than anticipated RIV(7-8) for model year 1992 and the larger than anticipated RIV(6-7) for model year 1993 were occasioned from the responses to the same questionnaire distributed by Consumer Reports in 1999. This suggests that the anomalously high Reliability Index Values are a result of the sample of that year, and to site manager this suggests puffing, or worse, by a group affiliated with Saturn, its suppliers, or its dealerships. In any case, until such time as the RIVs for the Saturn SL Sedan, SW Wagon stabilize, it would seem prudent, in deciding whether to purchase a new or used Saturn SL Sedan or SW Wagon, (1) to use the model's Table I Reliability Index Value for 1991-1992, -.25, rather than its two succeeding values and (2) to use the Saturn line's Table I and Table II Reliability Index Average for 1991-1992, -.25, rather than its two succeeding values.

3.      The Saturn line

I have visited several sites devoted to shared experiences by auto owners, but the one that describes the most egregious conduct by company and dealerships is entitled Information on New Saturn Reliability. If a visitor is considering the purchase of a Saturn product, Auto on Info site manager suggests reading the web pages on this site and then contacting the dealerships and company, by written correspondence (the site provides both the e-mail and the post mail addresses of Saturn customer service), to enquire as to how they recollect the facts. If 1/5 or more of what is alleged by the O'Neils regarding their Saturn and the conduct of the Saturn dealerships and Saturn's customer service is unrebutted or stands on the balance of the evidence, site manager suggests selecting a motor vehicle from another line and another manufacturer.

4.      The Honda and Acura lines

Site manager recommends that prospective Canadian and north central U.S. consumers contemplating the purchase of a Honda or Acura vehicle review the Canadian Automobile Association's reliability data. This organization's vehicle ownership survey results suggest that the reliability of most Honda models may be a more distant second to that of a corresponding Toyota model, at least in more northerly climates, than what the data on this site and in Consumer Reports suggest. To access the tables containing the individual vehicle ratings per the frequency of repair data, click here to be taken to the CAA’s web page from which a pdf file containing the tables may be downloaded. 

5.      The 2004 Nissan Armada and Nissan Titan and Other Newly Engineered Models to be Offered between 2004 and 2007

In an April 28, 2004, article entitled "Hyundai Up, Nissan Falls in Quality Study," Reuters reports that per the results of the J.D. Power "Initial Quality" survey, the number of complaints per 100 vehicles sold by Nissan North America in the United States rose to 147 in 2004 from 135 in 2003. This, by itself, should prompt a goodly amount of concern. In addition, in a May 17, 2004, article entitled "Nissan: The Squeaks Get Louder," Business Week cites instances that suggest that the jump in complaints and the corresponding fall in Nissan's standing among major North American automobile sellers from 6th place to 11th place are reflective of broader quality problems.  These cited instances, together with the jump in complaints, should prompt the exercise of considerable precaution in the purchase of a new vehicle in the Nissan line, primarily a new vehicle of a newly engineered model. Both articles mention the Titan pickup, the Armada sport utility vehicle, and the Quest minivan as disappointments.

More generally, as several auto manufacturers, especially the Big Three, are planning the introduction of a slew of new models between 2004 and 2007, the current problems of Nissan customers may be precursors to greater-than-usual headaches for buyers of Big Three vehicles of newly engineered models.

6.      General Motors

For those who think that a mule becomes a thoroughbred, or even a horse, buying a GM-engineered vehicle from the Chevrolet, Saturn, Pontiac, GMC, Oldsmobile, Buick, or Cadillac line seems okay. For the rest, not may be best. (See AOI March 2004 article "General Motors' U.S. 2003 Recall Numbers: A Bottomless Pit and a GM Defense?," July 2004 article "General Motors' Recalls Remain Gargantuan in First Half of 2004," August 2004 article "General Motors Safety Recalls Keep Rolling On," January 2004 article "Do General Motors' Pickup Trucks and SUVs Make a Grotesque Noise?," Mini-Survey No. 54 "GM's Piston Slap - Engine Knock," July 2003 article "Does GM's Cadillac Division Think that the Market for the Worst of the Worst is Boundless?" March 2004 article "Toyota Dominates List of Best Cars and Trucks; General Motors Dominates List of Worst Cars and Trucks," May 2004 article "General Motors Quality Drops Again," May 2004 article "Reworking Reality: Does General Motors Put Lipstick on Pigs?," August 2005 article "Speediest Dilapidations: General Motors Accounts for 16 of the 20 Worst," December 2005 article "By CR's Predicted Short-Term Reliability for Model Year 2006, Toyota and Honda Dominate Best, GM and Ford Dominate Worst," February 2006 article "Into the Pits and Down and Under Charges the General; General Motors Sets Record Share of CR's Much-Worse-Than-Average," November 2006 article "The 2006 Updates: Toyota Age-Equivalent Estimates: Estimates of When a Typical 1998 Model of Toyota Motor Corporation Will Be as Troublesome as Typical 1998 Models of General Motors Corporation and Its Several Marques Were Circa 3 Years, 4 Years, ..., and 7 Years of Age," November 2006 article "True Value Estimates of GM's 2007 Vehicles," February 2007 article "Does GM Mean Junk of the 7^th Level of Abomination?" March 2007 article "GM Maintains Leadership in Much-Worse-Than-Average: A Guide to Making Sales Challenging," March 2007 article "GM Expands Lead on CR's Used-Cars-to-Avoid List, a Tad," October 2007 article "By CR's Predicted Short-Term Reliability Scores for Model Year 2008, Toyota and Honda Marques Gather 5 of 6 Best, GM Marques Gather 3 of 7 Worst, 5 of 9 Worst and 7 of 13 Worst: Is GM on a Quest to Be Junk's Absolute Monarch?," November 2007 article "The Best and Worst 2008 Automobiles by CR's Reliability-Verdict History: Toyota Models Dominate Best and Account for All Perfect Reliability-Verdict Histories of 6 or More Years; GM Models Dominate Worst," Table I-MVRGH, and Table II-MVRGH.)

7.      The Engine Sludge Problem

Consumer Reports lists, in its August 2005 issue, on page 49, the following products as having enhanced likelihood of developing sludge in the engine:

Products of Volkswagen AG
	1997-2004 1.8L 4-cylinder turbo Audi A4
	1997-2004 1.8L 4-cylinder turbo Volkswagen Passat
Products of Chrysler Group of DaimlerChrysler AG
	1998-2002 2.7L V-6 Chrysler Concorde
	1998-2002 2.7L V-6 Chrysler Sebring
	1998-2002 2.7L V-6 Dodge Intrepid
	1998-2002 2.7L V-6 Dodge Stratus
Products of Saab Division of General Motors Corporation
	2000-2003 2.0L 4-cylinder turbo Saab 9-3 convertible
	2000-2002 2.0L 4-cylinder turbo Saab 9-3 hatchback
	1999 2.3L 4-cylinder turbo Saab 9-3 Viggen
	1999-2003 2.3L 4-cylinder turbo Saab 9-5
Products of the Toyota Motor Corporation
	1997-2001 3.0L V-6 Lexus ES300
	1999-2001 3.0L V-6 Lexus RX300
	1997-2001 3.0L V-6 Toyota Avalon
	1997-2001 3.0L V-6 Toyota Camry
	1997-2001 2.2L 4-cylinder Toyota Camry
	1999-2001 3.0L V-6 Toyota Camry Solara
	1999-2001 2.2L 4-cylinder Toyota Camry Solara
	1996-1999 2.2L 4-cylinder Toyota Celica
	2001 3.0L V-6 Toyota Highlander
	1997-2001 3.0L V-6 Toyota Sienna

Consumer Reports states that all but the Chrysler Group have extended the new-engine warranty to 8 years. The Chrysler Group, it states, deals with the problem on a "case-by-case basis."

For current owners, oil change receipts are important for persuading the manufacturer to foot the bill for a new engine. For second-hand buyers, oil change receipts should be acquired from the sellers and subsequent oil change receipts should be kept.

For those who purchase a used Toyota or Lexus product with the intent of owning it for an additional 20 or more years and 400,000 or more miles, the above may be less than prime prospects, even though the frequency of oil sludge in the engines of Toyota's above model-years is currently small.

For more information, see the article "CR Cars: Sludge: Jumping through Hoops to Make a Case," Consumer Reports, August 2005, p. 49. To subscribe to the Consumer Reports magazine via Amazon.com, click Consumer Reports.

8.      Blazing Fords

A Ford cruise control deactivation switch may have caused more than 520 Ford motor vehicle fires. NHTSA officials have stated that as many as 16 million Ford vehicles have the same or similar cruise control deactivation switch.

The following table provides a brief chronology of events pertaining to Ford's deactivation switch and reported fires.

9.      GM's Corroding Brake Sensors and Runaway Pickups and SUVs

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating some of General Motors Corporation's pickup trucks and SUVs for a corroding brake sensor. See "General Motors Vehicles Hit with Another Safety Investigation: NHTSA to Investigate 1.3 Million GM Pickup Trucks and SUVs for Corroding Brake Part," Auto on Info, May 2005 and "Don't Drive That GM Pickup or SUV," Auto on Info, May 2005. To view a Quick Fix solution to GM's corroding brake sensor and runaway trucks, click here.

10.    Quality-Control Auditor at GM-Toyota Joint Venture NUMMI Alleges Defect Cover-Up, per San Francisco Chronicle - November 2007

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Katy Cameron, a New United Motor Manufacturing Inc. employee who is currently on medical leave, alleges in a complaint filed with Alameda County Superior Court, that:

1. Since 1991, her job function has been to detect defects in vehicles manufactured at NUMMI's Fremont, California manufacturing plant, prior to shipment to dealers,

2. From 2005 to 2007, she was finding an average (presumably daily) of 9 to 15 defects per vehicle,

3. Her superiors altered her defect reports "in order to lower the daily Defect Per Vehicle" count,

4. She was threatened and harassed when she complained about the alterations to her superiors.

NUMMI is a joint venture of General Motors Corporation and Toyota Motor Corporation formed in 1984 to give Toyota North-American manufacturing experience.

Per Toyota Motor Corporation fact sheets and sales figures, the NUMMI plant manufactured all of the North-American-made vehicles badged as GM Pontiac Vibes in 2006, 96% of the Toyota Tacoma pickup trucks sold in the U.S. in 2006, and 60% of the Toyota Corollas made in North America and sold in the U.S. in 2006 and 52% of all Corollas sold in the U.S. in 2006. The Tacoma percentage assumes no across-border shipments with Mexico and the Corolla percentages assume no across-border shipments with Canada. All three models are engineered by Toyota.

No mention was made as to whether the defects were corrected before shipment to the dealers, but CR Reliability-Verdict histories suggest that repairs were made at the Fremont plant or by the dealer.

Factors that may serve to lend credibility to Ms. Cameron's allegations are:

1. General Motors Corporation, with a 1999-2003 Reliability Percentrank average of .31 and a 1999-2003 Reliability Grade average of F, has a half interest in NUMMI.

2. The Fremont plant is the only UAW-unionized vehicle manufacturing plant in which Toyota has an ownership interest.

3. The Fremont plant rests in North America.

4. Toyota Motor Corporation, with a 1999-2003 RPA of .89, has in the past expressed a desire to sever its NUMMI tie with GM, with a 1999-2003 RPA of .31, and consequently may have motive to sabotage the reputation and/or quality of GM's sole vehicle with a good reliability history, i.e., one with a CR Reliability-Verdict history from the 5 most-recent model years above .5, per Consumer Reports' Cars: Best & Worst for '08. For reference, see "The Best and Worst 2008 Automobiles by CR's Reliability-Verdict History: Toyota Models Dominate Best and Account for All Perfect Reliability-Verdict Histories of 6 or More Years; GM Models Dominate Worst," AutoOnInfo.net, November 2007.

While the conduct of the Fremont managers may be, assuming the allegations to be true, a simple instance of lower level management attempting to improve their management reputation among senior level management and/or to hold onto the their jobs, the consumer likely should proceed with considerable caution in purchasing a NUMMI vehicle, and may wish to exercise some, or more, caution when considering the purchase of a North-American-made vehicle, irrespective of manufacturer.

11.    The Worst Automobiles of 2008

In Consumer Reports' Cars: Best & Worst for '08, the Consumers Union provides a history of reliability verdicts for most of the automobile models sold in the U.S. For each model year for which data exist, a model is accorded a reliability verdict of much better than average, better than average, average, worse than average, or much worse than average. The history of reliability verdicts for a model may be up to 10 model years (1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007); however, if a manufacturer simultaneously refreshens and renames a model (as General Motors Corporation seems often disposed to do), CR's reliability history in this publication begins with the model year of refreshment.

By ascribing +1 to CR's verdict of much better than average, +.5 to CR's second-highest verdict, 0 to CR's average verdict, -.5 to CR's second-worst verdict, and -1 to CR's worst verdict, then adding together the numerical values so obtained for each model, and finally dividing by the number of verdicts for the model, a composite reliability value, ranging from +1 (perfect score) to -1 (worst-possible score), may be obtained.

To assist the consumer in avoiding the worst of 2008, the following table lists those models with composite reliability values from 0 to -1 for the 5 most-recent model years.

Table of the Worst Cars and Trucks of 2008 by CR Reliability-Verdict History from the 5 Most-Recent Model Years
Model	Composite Reliability Value	Number of Model Years Offering Reliability Verdicts
BMW X3	0	4
General Motors' Cadillac STS V6	0	2
General Motors' Chevrolet Malibu V6	0	5
General Motors' Chevrolet TrailBlazer 6-cylinder	0	5
Chrysler 300 V8	0	3
Chrysler PT Cruiser turbo	0	4
Chrysler Sebring sedan V6	0	3
Ford F-150 V8 4-wheel-drive	0	5
Ford Mustang V8	0	5
Ford Ranger 4-wheel-drive	0	5
Ford Five Hundred/Taurus front-wheel-drive	0	3
General Motors' GMC Acadia	0	1
General Motors' GMC Envoy 6-cylinder	0	5
Ford's Jaguar XJ	0	1
Hyundai's Kia Spectra	0	2
Mazda B-Series	0	4
Mazda5	0	2
Mercedes-Benz C-Class V6	0	5
Mitsubishi Eclipse	0	3
Mitsubishi Lancer	0	1
Nissan 350Z	0	4
Nissan Versa hatchback	0	1
General Motors' Pontiac Grand Prix	0	4
Porsche Cayenne	0	3
General Motors' Saturn Outlook	0	1
Volkswagen Eos	0	1
Ford's Volvo C70	0	2
Ford's Volvo S80 6-cylinder	0	1
General Motors' Chevrolet Impala V6	-.10	4
Mazda6 V6	-.13	4
Porsche Boxster	-.13	4
Chrysler's Dodge Durango	-.13	4
General Motors' Chevrolet Cobalt	-.17	3
Volkswagen GTI	-.17	3
Ford's Volvo S40/V40,V50 non-turbo	-.17	3
General Motors' Cadillac CTS V6	-.20	5
General Motors' Chevrolet Tahoe	-.20	5
Chrysler's Dodge RAM 1500 4-wheel-drive	-.20	5
Chrysler's Dodge RAM 2500 turbodieasel 4-wheel-drive	-.20	5
General Motors' GMC Yukon	-.20	5
Chrysler's Jeep Liberty V6	-.20	5
Nissan Sentra	-.20	5
General Motors' Saturn Vue	-.20	5
BMW 6-Series	-.25	2
BMW 7-Series	-.25	4
General Motors' Cadillac DTS	-.25	2
General Motors' Cadillac SRX V6	-.25	4
General Motors' Chevrolet HHR	-.25	2
Ford's Jaguar X-Type	-.25	2
Chrysler's Jeep Commander V8	-.25	2
Volkswagen's Audi A4 4-cylinder	-.30	5
Mercedes-Benz E-Class V6 rear-wheel-drive	-.30	5
General Motors' Cadillac Escalade (except EXT)	-.40	5
General Motors' Chevrolet Corvette	-.40	5
General Motors' Chevrolet Silverado 1500 V8 4-wheel-drive	-.40	5
General Motors' Chevrolet Suburban 1500	-.40	5
Chrysler's Dodge Dakota	-.40	5
Ford Explorer V6	-.40	5
General Motors' GMC Sierra 1500 V8 4-wheel-drive	-.40	5
General Motors' GMC Suburban/Yukon XL 1500	-.40	5
Ford's Mercury Mountaineer V6	-.40	5
General Motors' Chevrolet Avalanche 1500	-.50	5
General Motors' Chevrolet Aveo	-.50	3
General Motors' Chevrolet Equinox	-.50	3
Chrysler Town & Country extended	-.50	5
Chrysler's Dodge Grand Caravan	-.50	5
Hyundai Tiburon	-.50	2
Nissan's Infiniti QX56	-.50	2
Ford's Jaguar S-Type	-.50	2
Hyundai's Kia Amanti	-.50	2
Hyundai's Kia Sorento	-.50	4
Mazda CX-9	-.50	1
Mazda RX-8	-.50	3
Mercedes-Benz M-Class V6	-.50	5
Mercedes-Benz S-Class V8 rear-wheel-drive	-.50	1
General Motors' Saab 9-3	-.50	5
Suzuki Grand Vitara	-.50	1
Volkswagen Passat V6 front-wheel-drive	-.50	4
Ford's Volvo S40/V40,V50 turbo all-wheel-drive	-.50	1
Ford's Volvo XC90 V8	-.50	3
Mercedes-Benz CLK	-.60	5
Chrysler Pacifica	-.63	4
Nissan Titan 4-wheel-drive	-.67	3
Ford's Lincoln Navigator	-.70	5
General Motors' Hummer H2	-.75	2
Mercedes-Benz SLK V6	-.75	2
Nissan Quest	-.75	4
Volkswagen New Beetle	-.80	5
General Motors' Chevrolet Colorado 4-wheel-drive	-.83	3
General Motors' GMC Canyon 4-wheel-drive	-.83	3
General Motors' Pontiac G6	-.83	3
Volkswagen Toureg	-.83	3
Ford F-250 turbodiesel 4-wheel-drive	-.90	5
Chrysler's Jeep Grand Cherokee V8	-.90	5
Hyundai's Kia Sedona	-.90	5
Volkswagen's Audi A8	-1.00	2
Volkswagen's Audi Q7 V8	-1.00	1
General Motors' Chevrolet Uplander	-1.00	3
Chrysler's Dodge Magnum	-1.00	2
Chrysler's Dodge Nitro	-1.00	1
General Motors' Hummer H3	-1.00	2
Hyundai Entourage	-1.00	1
Chrysler's Jeep Wrangler 4-door	-1.00	1
Ford's Land Rover Range Rover	-1.00	1
Ford's Land Rover Range Rover Sport	-1.00	1
Ford's Lincoln Mark LT	-1.00	1
Mazda CX-1	-1.00	1
Mercedes-Benz CLS	-1.00	1
Mercedes-Benz GL-Class V8	-1.00	1
Mercedes-Benz R-Class V6	-1.00	1
Mercedes-Benz SL	-1.00	2
Nissan Armada 4-wheel-drive	-1.00	3
General Motors' Pontiac Solstice	-1.00	1
General Motors' Saturn Sky	-1.00	1
Ford's Land Rover LR3	-1.00	2

The following chart depicts each manufacturer's share of this Worst of 2008.

The following charts depict the percentage of models, with a CR Reliability-Verdict history of one or model years, that are among the Worst of 2008, for each of the lines of each of the three largest contributors to the Worst of 2008.

Source: "Vehicle Profiles," Consumer Reports: Cars: Best & Worst of '08, pp.43-176