Toys4RJill

Does anyone believe that there is a secret sauce that only Toyota knows but other don’t? Car companies reverse engineer cars all the time, so Toyota’s secrets are there to be discovered. It is all in the design and what the car companies “want“ to spend and if they want to make it work. Toyota can sign off a reliable BMW Supra or a Lexus GSMazda, and what they sign off can be something that can be average, reliable etc etc.

There was a time when GM was very reliable and a long lasting. Car brands such as BMW or MB do not sell reliability. But you can bet they can bake reliability into their cars if they want.

EXE46

I have never liked Mazdas, when i hear Mazda, i remember the lousy cars of the past like the 323, 626 , 929, Milennia et al. Partner with Infiniti if you want but not Mazda or just build your own and stop these lousy partnerships. It's ok, Genesis is looking more compelling by the hour.

Toyota looks like they hope to follow in Kodak's footstep anyway. No company is too big and or profitable to fail. I have two months left with my 3IS sedan and will not be getting another Lexus and I have seen even some die hard prior Lexus fans moving away from the brand for various reasons. Partnering with Mazda won't bring us back.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

Yeah with the 53 AMG Series! I'd love to try one out.

GaryJG

Toyota has figured out that low-volume models are not worth the investment in design, development, and manufacturing without teaming up with another manufacturer.

The economies of scale can be shown to enable the vehicles to be built profitably, but only when sharing development costs. Selling two versions under two brand names doesn’t hurt when the second brand is one as respected as Toyota.

oldcajun

I'm only 79 years old so I can't remember that time! My first GM was a used 55 Chevy and it was the most reliable of all the ones I had. It's great advantage was that it was a bare minimum 6 cyl with a stick. Almost nothing to break. I did have several brake jobs and clutch replacements during the 4 years I had it, but my dad and I did the work with parts from Western Auto. My next car was a '63 Pontiac LeMans with the solid driveshaft and rear mounted transmission. Among other major failures, I broke the driveshaft. Because it takes me a while to learn things, I bought a '68 Bonneville convertible. Major overheating problems traced to a blown head gasket caused by a milling defect on the head. Still being stupid, I bought a '77 Caprice with the 4 barrel 350 V-8. GM in its infinite wisdom (and rush to grab a few profit dollars) used their smallest Hydromatic transmission behind the big V-8. Surprise! Two total transmission failures in 20,000 miles.

My first exposure to a reliable car was when I bought my wife a '76 Honda Accord. It went 4 years and 50,000 miles without a single repair! Since then I have bought only Honda (Acura) or Toyota (Lexus) cars. None have disappointed me from a reliability standpoint.

mmarshall

Yep.....'55-'57 Chevys were a legend.

The driveshaft on those early-60s Pontiac compacts was actually flexible, not solid. That was so it could move up and down with the transmission/final-drive assembly and rear suspension/live axle.



Unusual. Except for Chevy's motor-mounts, most of the late-60s GM cars, especially the full-sized cars, were reliable by the standards of their time.

Yep, GM made a LOT of stupid mistakes and poor engineering from the late 70s to the early 90s. Using 6-banger trannies on the V8s was just one of many.

Yep...the only real problem on those late-70s Accords was body rust. They were actually recalled for that issue....you could usually tell which ones had been recalled, because they had brand-new front-fenders (and new paint), while the rest of the car had faded paint.

nicedude

Always wanted a modern Cressida. Maybe Mazda will build one in partnership with Toyota/Lexus. Well, hopefully Toyota just buys Mazda some day. A more reliable Mazda with great resale value would be peak early 90's Honda. Being rwd with an option inline six engine... well that is peak early 90's Toyota. You guys will be missing out.

spwolf

it is question of priority... if you go and read how Supra was done, you would read that Toyota engineers were surprised how every part of BMW design started from chassis and how much time BMW spent on chassis while BMW engineers were surprised that every single part of the vehicle was tested independently at TMC labs in Japan.

You only have 4-5 years to finish the car, every company have different priorities and it would be extremely hard for any company to change their culture easily... Toyota's is based on QDR, that is what they preach and live by.

Toys4RJill

People do not buy BMW's because they are reliable and never break. They buy them because of the chassis or driving experience. The opposite for Toyota however the last while Toyota is trying to their driving experiences to a higher level with BMW. In your opinion, do you think BMW cannot make a very reliable car?

situman

With Toyota going full steam ahead with full electric vehicles, we probably should expect more of these collaborations. It will be unwise to stretch resources so thinly to develop 2 types of vehicles at the same time. Let someone else do the grunt work then just do QC on it.

evident

I don't think this is true anymore... Their V6's and V8's while very reliable have below average fuel efficiency now , and they are dinosaurs at this point. Their 4cyl turbo in the IS200t and NX200t is not the most powerful nor the most fuel efficient in its category. New engines cant come soon enough. I am not sure why people are ragging on the LS's TTV6 but it's a step in the right direction.

natnut

Could this mean the resurrection of the GS nameplate as an Audi A7, BMW 6 series GC and MB CLS competitor?

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

maybe 4 cylinders, but not 6 or 8?

and the rest of the world has gone turbo which may lower fuel economy if you want more power, but it seems to have worked out ok for everyone else.

Sulu

I am talking about the new 2.5-litre 4-cylinder in the Camry, the 2.0-litre 4-cylinder in the Corolla Hatchback and UX, and the twin-turbo V6 in the LS; these are the TNGA Dynamic Force engines. We are still waiting for other Dynamic Force engines, maybe a non-turbo V6 and maybe a turbo-4. These new Dynamic Force engines have great (top) thermal efficiency.

The other V6s, V8s, and 2.5-litre 4-cyl (in the older Camrys), the 2.0-litre turbo (in the NX) and 1.8-litre 4-cyl engines are old-generation engines.

situman

As much as Toyota likes to tout thermal efficiency with their new DF 4cylinder engines, the power output still lags others and peak power is still peaky, despite what they claim about low end torque. Refinement is another sticking point with the new 4cyls especially the one in the new RAV4. Lots of mileage gains are from more gears or from the fancy new CVT in the new Corolla.