mmarshall

Oh, no doubt. I'm not denying that. But there's also no doubt, as I pointed out eariler, that the current GM Chairman is far more credible and impressive than his predecessors, especially Roger Smith and Bob Stempel, who, IMO, helped ruin the company and oversaw some of the worst vehicles they produced.

The top people at Toyota were also slow to admit mistakes....and lowering quality. We saw that in the 15 years (1994-2009) it took to finally make a full-size truck that was competitive with the Ford F-150 and Chevy Silverado....and when the CEO and other top officials were called to testify before Congress.

spwolf

doesnt Toyota still have a lot more CR recommended models than anyone else?

It seems to me that you are picking and choosing here...

spwolf

there is no going back :-). But I dont think dealers are any sign of future success though... back in 2008, we had tears in our eyes when new Avensis Wagon was shown at dealer congress in Barcelona, everyone was cheering, etc, 3 years later... car failed to sell well :-)

IS-SV

I understand why you are a fan of the cars, actually having owned a couple. Not that anybody cares anymore. Yes the Saturn division started as a good idea but the history shows nothing but billions in losses, much of which US taxpayers are still on the hook for. The safety experts tested the early Saturns and gave them poor to fair ratings for safety. Surviving rollovers is easy and most sedans/coupes could accomplish that, crashes involving solid objects and safer cars was another story. Low insurance rates don't reflect low injury and death rates for these cars, they refect demographics of the buyers and the low dollar value claims because the cars were cheap to repair and were essentially disposable cars.

Cherry-picking out a the few reliable Saturn models from history is nice, but the overall brand reliabilty was subpar and typical of GM quality.

Saturn in the end became sad automotive history, because of poor follow-through and mostly crap products and they have the billions in audited losses to prove it. Sadly if that represents the best of GM (in your eyes at least), it's no wonder they went bankrupt. But I understand why you feel the way you do about Saturn, in the end the more demanding buyers went elsewhere. More on topic the same potential Saturn buyers ended up making cars like the Toyota Camry and Corrolla huge selling profitable successes.

LexFather

It was headed to debut this summer/fall but dealers again hated it and told Toyota they got to do better. Not sure what/if Toyota will do anything.

It was a new current generation 2007 Altima and we looked at 2010s before replacing it. The interior is worst in class and not to sound snooty but I hated being inside. Loud, course, rough. Funny but it looked like my GS on the outside but that is all. I do agree it was better than the generation before it but that interior was laughable, as MT stated "it looks like a 15 year old Korean car" and this was in 2002 or so. (now the Murano/Maxima have Inifniti level interiors as Nissan has stepped it up).

I agree that Toyota/Honda are no longer the default winners in class like in the 80s and 90s. The competition has gotten better and Toyota/Honda haven't leaped like in the past. Ford, GM, Hyundai, Nissan, etc etc have all stepped it up.

I'm glad he is talking. Lets see them walking. In 15-20 years lets see how these new GM cars hold up and how the company is going. 1-3 years doesn't impress me, ESPECIALLY when you should have been like this in the first place.

Oh its possible, just reporting findings.

TRDFantasy

The Sonata's reputation has improved yes, but the question is will it last? If sales keep steady over the next few years then we can say the reputation has definitely improved long-term. If Sonata sales drop once all the big competitors in the segment are redesigned, then I think we can conclude it was mostly hype and dated competitors that gave the current Sonata some initial hype and a sales spike.

We will have to see how the Sonata does in the future, especially against the upcoming redesigned competition.

Very well said. A lot of people jumping to conclusions, and assuming Toyota will continue to sit back. The sleeping giant has awakened so to speak.

That doesn't make much sense.

The new Camry was shown a few months ago at the US dealers meeting, and the word was that dealers really liked it. This directly contradicts the word that came out of the dealers meeting a few months back.

1.) Ford and Nissan with the Fusion and Altima did cost cutting measures in their own ways. Can you point to specific concrete examples regarding the Camry vs. the competition? Seat bottoms on Toyotas are still better than much of the industry, especially Honda, which is notorious for short seat bottoms. Camry has BEST-in-class rear seating, complete with reclining rear seats. So where is this so-called "sneaky" cost cutting in the rear seating area? Yes Toyota plastics have gone down in quality, but this is different from reliability and durability of Toyota vehicles. If you want to talk about which car among the Camry, Altima, and Fusion will have the fewest problems and hold up 10 years down the road, if I had to bet, I would bet the Camry above the Altima and Fusion.

2.) In the 70s? Really? A lot of Toyota models in the 70s had bad rust problems, and 70s Toyota models are very, very rare because so many of them simply rusted away. It was only in the 80s that Toyota reliability really reached the legendary levels it has been known for.

Yes Toyota models have gone down somewhat in Consumer Reports, but CR still recommends A LOT of Toyota models. Also, warranty claims for Toyota have gone down over the past 10 years, not up. If Toyota reliability and durability was declining, then warranty rates would be increasing, not decreasing. This excludes the recall business last year, as I'm sure that probably affected warranty rates.

3.) Compared to past Camry models? Cars in general are becoming more complex, both mechanically and electronically. You cannot expect mechanical complexity to remain the same over decades. If we compare this to 1960's Toyota models, those were extremely simple mechanically-speaking, but would it be fair to compare them to modern cars? Of course not. Looking at the industry right now OVERALL, Toyotas are STILL some of the easiest in the industry to work on mechanically.

Like I said, talk to some mechanics. I have, and they all say the same thing about Toyotas; even new Toyota models are straightforward to work on mechanically.

4.) This myth has been debunked several times before.

Fact: a 1995 BASE MODEL DX Camry had an MSRP of $16,418 back in 1995. Adjusted to inflation to say 2010, this would be about $23,491. Let's look at the base price of a 2011 Camry shall we? Base MSRP for a 2011 Camry is $19,820. Even the popular 2011 Camry LE model has a base MSRP of $21,275.

That's not even mentioning the fact that you get a lot of features, and safety on a new Camry that the 90s Camry never had.

What was that you were saying about "skyrocketing" prices? Would you care to perhaps revise your argument? I'd love for you to come back and post at the end of 2011 and again at the end of 2012. I'm willing to bet you'll be wrong.

You get what you pay for though, why don't some of you Toyota loyalists understand this simple concept ?

The 90s Camry models were MORE expensive, relative to the dollar value back then. In other words, the MSRP of 90s Camrys adjusted to inflation today makes the base MSRP of those models several thousand US dollars MORE expensive than the 2011 Camry.

Yes, while in some ways the 90s Camry was better, it was also more expensive for the time. Specifically, if you look at the base MSRP of the V6 Camry in the 90s, and adjust it for inflation to today's dollars, it would cost about the same as a new Avalon! Now surely, I can't imagine Toyota loyalists trying to claim a 90s Camry was more luxurious and comfortable than a brand new Avalon.

This is similar to how some Toyota loyalists complain about the Avalon and how it's not as good as the Cressida was. Cressida base MSRP in 1992 was $24,428. Adjusted to 2010 dollars, that is roughly $37,966. That is Lexus pricing. The Cressida in terms of quality and luxury was basically a Lexus without the Lexus badge.

Like I said, you get what you pay for. Everything is relative.

I love Cressidas and I love the 90s Camry models, but I am not going to pretend they cost the same for the time back then as they would now, taking into account inflation. Cressidas back then sold almost for Lexus money, and Camry models back then basically sold for Avalon money.

LexFather

^^ Hey just reporting what I heard. Maybe it was a regional meeting and not national? I have yet to get any solid info outside the Entune system I reported months ago.

TRDFantasy

Thanks for the news in any case .

I think that is likely, regional meeting vs a national meeting. There could definitely be subjective differences in taste, especially comparing certain regions to others.

It's amazing how tight news has been on the new Camry. When the current dated model debuted years ago, we had already seen leaked photos of the model months before. Toyota has implemented some Fort Knox-style security it seems.

Fizzboy7

2) Toyota service bays have exploded because Toyota is selling a zillion more cars compared to yesteryear. The more cars you sell, the more cars come in for service, the busier the technicians become (the more money they make). The increase in business is in no way because the cars are breaking down.

TRDFantasy

Very good point I forgot about . Toyota in the 70s and 80s sold a tiny amount of cars compared to now.

mmarshall

Toyota's popularity, in the U.S., actually started expending rapidly in the 1970s, particularly the late 70s, as more and more Americans grew weary of the comparably low quality of domestically-designed vehicles. Honda's popularity, despite the success of the original late-70s Accord, did not really get going until several years later, in the 1980s.

A classic ad by Chevy/Geo (and I remember it well) was...."In the Seventies, you got to know Toyota. In the Eighties, you got to know Honda. In the Nineties, you'll get to know Geo".

IS-SV

Yes, but as he said only a small number of cars were sold in the US in the 70's and 80's when compared to today. Or in other words, US market share for Toyota was much smaller back then (as a percentage of total US sales) and Toyota was not dominant in the US market like it is today. Agreed, in the 80's Honda was the preferred brand for those seeking a bit more of a drivers car, I owned several back then.

btw, good example of the failed Geo advertising.

TRDFantasy

Didn't Honda's first big success in the US come from the 70s Civic?

mmarshall

The 1975 Civic CVCC -engine (there was also a version with a conventional 4-cylinder) was the first vehicle to meet 1975 emission standards without a catalyst or the need to use more expensive unleaded fuel, and, for that reason, it enjoyed some popularity. But its miniscule size (smaller than today's Mini), relatively poor crash-protection, poor start-up/cold engine drivability with the ultra-lean fuel mixture, and noisy, uncomfortable ride all worked against it. But, to be fair, carburator drivability problems in the Emission Age weren't really solved until EFI became standard in the late 1980's.

It took the first Accord, in 1976, though, to really open the public's eyes to what Honda could accomplish with their designs. The Accord, even with carburator/drivability problems and body rust, was a smash hit since Day One, and has continued to be an automotive icon ever since.

Let's not get too far off-topic, though. We were originally talking about the Camry's popularity, and how long it might (or might not) remain as the #1-selling American-market passenger car.

Coconut

As of right now, I'd go with the Elantra and Sonata over a Corolla and Camry.