bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

crazy double-talk. what's next, 'top safety pick gold' or 'top super safety pick'?

seanlee

i have to agree with this statement.

i recall few years back when there was a test showing how much does it cost to fix a slow speed collusion and everyone performed poorly. Toyota re-engineered the car to beat the test by inserting a small bock of supporting structure directly at the center of the rear bumper just for this test. and their car performed so well that the IIHS felt the need to tear down the bumper only to find out this trick. if the collusion is anything off the direct center, the result would be back to the year before.

not to say prep for exam is a bad thing, but Honda/Volvo clearly design for safety while others design to meet the safety test. sort like saying Ford design their car to only do good in EPA test while Prius gives you much more consistent fuel economy.

give credit where it is due.

84Cressida

They added some changes to the just released 2013 model, after already having knowledge that the IIHS was doing these tests. Rest assured, Toyota will do the necessary changes to ace this test in short order.

LexFather

I know the usual suspects want to login and defend Honda's honor but no one said anything bad about the Accord. They usually perform very well in tests. Spwolf is adding data from Europe that says Toyota does well too. Clearly in this test Toyota did poor.

And no matter what the internet fighting does (usually by people not even buying these cars)
1. Camry will sell
2. Accord will sell

Of course Toyota bad news gets magnified and we should all be used to it. Toyota is one of the top corporations in the world and one of the biggest. It sells papers to talk Toyota. Not so Honda.


irony overload

newr

Really? To the uninformed buyers..yes.

Lets do a test.. show the video to any potential Camry buyers as they walk into the dealership and see if they still would walk out the dealership with the keys to the brand new Camry in their hands.

ydooby

Well I do this when I'm out of ideas defending Toyota in other forums. I would fire my criticism against Toyota here with the same reasoning that people elsewhere use to bash Toyota so that I can gather enough counterpoints from members here to respond to them there.

But anyway, getting a "Poor" or a below-4-star rating from a safety test is never good publicity and I still find it hard to defend for them despite a few counterpoints being raised here (and no, "Camry will sell" is not one of them). Toyota should do well learning from such experiences with these recent test changes, and try to be more thorough in their safety designs rather than simply reacting to new standards in order to avoid appearing at the bottom of these lists again.

LexFather

Lol, you are joking right? Both are bought b/c consumers trust the name and both even with some negatives are overwhelmingly good cars. We have seen the last few years that the Camry/Accord sell, period, end of discussion no matter how good/bad people say they are, no matter how good the competition gets. We have seen the Camry amazingly still sell at a #1 rate, previous gen and this gen.

Look I know its very very popular to beat up the Camry but the Camry is the one laughing all the way to the bank. Clearly the Camry does something right. If we just read here and the internetz you would think the Camry is a complete disaster the last 15 years.


Don't let your conscience get to you lol. Nowhere am I defending Toyota nor attacking Honda. Toyota failed the test, Honda passed with flying colors, end of discussion. I am unsure why spwolf bringing up that Toyota has done very well in Europe somehow ruffled feathers like he cursed out people's sisters on a Lexus forum.

TRDFantasy

Yes, poor showing for Toyota, but most automakers aren't doing well in this test. Give Toyota some time.

Also as spywolf mentioned, this is ONE test. In the stringent European crash tests, Toyota models do VERY well. Toyota models do well in all crash tests, this brand new test by the IIHS is the only one where new Toyota models do poorly. Again, it is but ONE test.

It's pathetic at the amount of trolls and haters that come out of nowhere bashing Toyota hard, where there are some situations where Honda and others do poorly and not a word about that is mentioned.

ydooby

Not sure how you get the impression that spwolf's mention of Toyota's EuroNCAP results were getting negative responses. I was simply restating to him the reasons why I think EuroNCAP's results are irrelevant to my concern here (that Toyota appearing to do too little beyond what are asked from the existing test standards is going to hurt them), not to invalidate the facts he brought up.

TRDFantasy

My blunt opinion; there are so many silly opinions on the internet, it's impossible and also pointless to try and argue with them all.

Toyota models have proven themselves very well plenty of times in real world crash tests. To say Toyota only designs cars to do well in crash tests, while Honda "over-engineers" their cars to do well in all scenarios is absolute nonsense. Honda cars in almost every aspect are engineered to a minimum. Period.

That's it for me in this thread.

newr

No I am not joking. I am talking about this particular crash test video and its potential to turn buyers away if they SAW the video.

A friend bough a 2012 Camry Hybrid few months back and is looking for another car for his daughter. He had a hard time deciding between another Camry and the new Accord. We had lunch today and he told me he is NOT getting Camry anymore because of the new crash test. I did not know what the heck he was talking about. He explained it to me and still I was like what the big deal until I saw this video and I understood why.

84Cressida

You have absolutely nothing to back up that they did "little beyond what is asked from them" especially seeing how Toyota is far from alone in being caught off guard here.

I've seen many of the IIHS tests done since 1995, and Toyota has consistently been at the top. Compare the performance of cars like the 1996 4Runner, 1997 Camry, 2002 Camry, and 2000 Tundra to some of their contemporary cars, especially those from the domestics, and Toyota beat them handidly. And just like back then, the IIHS test is NOT a federal test and not required, yet Toyota still did well.

ydooby

Not sure how you missed my point after I repeated it for so many times. The point is not that Toyota doesn't do well in the established tests. They do very well, often the best in class in fact. However, when test standards change unexpectedly, they get noticeably lower ratings than the others in the same class, the examples of which include not only this new IIHS small overlap test, but also the revised NHTSA test where the Camry was one of the only two cars to receive a 3-star rating or below at the test's debut (the Versa managed to get just 2 stars).

LexFather

What is of more interest to me is the Insurance industry conducting their own tests. Not exactly fair now is it as this is another opportunity to jack up rates.

Clearly some people will think it is a big deal but egads this is a car that has gotten hammered for recalls, pedal fiasco, "omg it sucks", crash failing, etc etc etc and its still a car that is better than most.

If he doesn't want a Camry, more power to him. Again no one is saying the new Accord didn't do a great job passing the test and I don't see anyone taking anything away from the Accord.

ydooby

Toyota certainly isn't the only one caught off guard in this new IIHS test. But I struggle to find good enough reasons to argue with the Honda fans over why the Accord managed to survive both the recent NHTSA change and this new IIHS test, while the Camry didn't.

Anyway I'm off to the other forums to defend Toyota by repeating what some of you guys said even though I'm still not totally convinced myself lol. Being a Toyota fan isn't easy sometimes you know.