America owes Toyota an apology

racerfink wrote: Still doesn't make it right.

Amen brother, you're preaching to the choir. I can't explain how furious and disillusioned I was when I entered the biz and watched our firm place 'experts' in news broadcasts to repeat the talking points we had rehearsed with them.

JeepinMatt - No kidding Toyota didn't claim authorship of the piece - nobody ever does (except maybe terrorist organizations?). Besides, Toyota didn't pass the piece on to the WSJ, some third-party who may or may not have been in their employ did. Outrageous or not, this is business as usual in the industry.

Oldsaw - These days bloggers are racing to beat the big guys, and the big guys are copy-pasting the bloggers because they don't want to miss a scoop. Due-diligence has been on the decline ever since the ascendancy of the 24-hour news channels two decades ago - everything is about viewership/traffic numbers today, because that drives prestige and advertising revenue.

nderwater wrote: Besides, Toyota didn't pass the piece on to the WSJ, some third-party who may or may not have been in their employ did.

Close 'nuff. I'm not surprised at what transpired, I'm just not ready to hoist Toyota back onto the pedestal they fell off of years ago.

alfadriver wrote: Well, to be fair, we should also apologize to Ford (Pinto and Explorer), Audi (5000), GM (trucks) etc.

The Ford Pinto had a real problem with the fuel tank placement, just like Crown Vics do today.

And the Yaris is the best econobox currently in production IMO. What's wrong with the one you drove?

nderwater wrote:

racerfink wrote: Still doesn't make it right.

Oldsaw - These days bloggers are racing to beat the big guys, and the big guys are copy-pasting the bloggers because they don't want to miss a scoop. Due-diligence has been on the decline ever since the ascendancy of the 24-hour news channels two decades ago - everything is about viewership/traffic numbers today, because that drives prestige and advertising revenue.

I left in racerfink's response because it's appropriate.

My degree is in Communications/Public Relations, but it was earned in a time when research and accountability were sacramount principles to journalists and even good business men

The blogging phenomena has pretty much out-lived its' usefulness as anyone with an internet connection and an opinion can annoint themselves as the next Pulitzer winner.

On the other hand, I revel in seeing the angst within media outlets that can't figure out their survival depends on the integrity of journalism, not adhering to an ideology.

GameboyRMH wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Well, to be fair, we should also apologize to Ford (Pinto and Explorer), Audi (5000), GM (trucks) etc.

The Ford Pinto had a real problem with the fuel tank placement, just like Crown Vics do today. And the Yaris is the best econobox currently in production IMO. What's wrong with the one you drove?

The Crown Vic does not have a gas tank problem. It's in the exact same place as every other modern car (in front of the rear axle). The CV's problem was parked cruisers getting rear-ended at 70-80 MPH! NO car is going to survive that without major problems. With the shield in place though, now the CV does. Name me one other car that can get smacked in the ass by a giant soccer-mom SUV at 80 and not leak anything, catch fire, or kill the occupants.

GameboyRMH wrote: And the Yaris is the best econobox currently in production IMO. What's wrong with the one you drove?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

wait.... that wasn't a joke?

Bobzilla wrote:

GameboyRMH wrote: And the Yaris is the best econobox currently in production IMO. What's wrong with the one you drove?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! wait.... that wasn't a joke?

It's cheap, it's very good on gas, has good interior space for it's size, and it's reliable (not to say Toyota's reliability hasn't been declining). It doesn't look bad for a modern car either. That covers all the econobox bases, am I missing something?

You said better than any other in production. I think you're on crack. Differences of opinion is all.

Here's my take on the Yaris: It has NO creature comforts without paying out the wazzoo to get them. It's interior looks, feels and sounds super cheap. It reminds you constantly that you bought the cheapest thing Toyota churned out. It's OK on gas. It's EPA sticker ratings are optimistic, where others in the class are lowball numbers. It's not that cheap. $15k for a cheapo, super cheap feeling car is not cheap.

P71 wrote: The Crown Vic does not have a gas tank problem. It's in the exact same place as every other modern car (in front of the rear axle). The CV's problem was parked cruisers getting rear-ended at 70-80 MPH! *NO* car is going to survive that without major problems. With the shield in place though, now the CV does. Name me one other car that can get smacked in the ass by a giant soccer-mom SUV at 80 and not leak anything, catch fire, or kill the occupants.

Everything I can find indicates that's it's directly behind the rear axle - not near the very rear of the vehicle like the Pinto, but definitely behind the axle. It may not be as serious but it really isn't a good design.

Again, find me one other car that can survive 70-80MPH rear-endings without exploding or killing occupants. There's over 3 feet of structure in between the rear edge of the car and the gas tank.

The problem with the Pinto's was in a rear end crash, the exhaust pipe and clamp would puncture the tank and boom, fireball.

The CV's suffer from crash standards it was never designed to meet. The gas tank sits above and behind the rear axle and in a crash gets pushed into the exhaust system and then boom, fireball. IIRC.

As for Toiletta, phuck em.

Brian

Actually the tank it's the rear axle, which is why that put a plastic shield on them. Mine has that. I also routed my exhaust under the axle for extra room and power.

GameboyRMH wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Well, to be fair, we should also apologize to Ford (Pinto and Explorer), Audi (5000), GM (trucks) etc.

The Ford Pinto had a real problem with the fuel tank placement, just like Crown Vics do today. And the Yaris is the best econobox currently in production IMO. What's wrong with the one you drove?

We've been through this multiple times- the Pinto was a set up- and had a common design with most of the cars of the period. I have to just look in my garage at my Alfa to see a copy. Most of the urban legends about the case were things either falsified or taken out of context/attributed to the wrong author. The Crown Vic? 80mph rear ending, with a jack and other things in the trunk set up to puncture the tank- that too was exposed.

As for the Yaris.... as posted before- in order of how I noticed them: 1) Ergonomics- the middle mounted dash may look interesting, but it's totally distracting, and a very, very poor execution of a dash. One should not have to turn left or right to see that information. Major fail. 2) Interior- every single surface besides the seats were hard plastic. Considering how often it's brought up, I figured that this would never happen in a Toyota. Then the seats- I could not find a very comfortable position, and by the time we got to Ponce- my leg was very sore. Thankfully (for it) the bad interior distracted my wife from the poor NVH. 3) engine- all in all, ok- but pretty gutless, it could be for my other major problem- 4) transmission- holy hunting. Totally inexcusable shift schedule, where you slow down as you climb a hil, and when if finally downshifts, you are now at 5000rpm- followed by an upshift- repeat without stopping. No way to climb a mountain with a constant speed- which makes it a MAJOR PAIN when in traffic. Horrible, horrible, horrible. (BTW, we have gotten into the second decade of 2000- you CAN use more than 4 forward speeds). 5) steering- uh- couldn't feel a thing.

And while a manual everything is somewhat acceptable, the fact that each of the manual components were a pain to deal with isn't. Had I not had a passenger, the pass mirror would have been a major pain to deal with. And reaching the rear doors wasn't as easy as one would expect....

Again, considering how cheap a POS that was, I honestly thing that many Toyota owners use the "reliabilty and reputation" excuse as a reason to justify owning such horrible cars AND paying such a premium for such garbage.

Best car? Seirously? Cool aid sweet?

Get out more. There's a LOT better out there.

There's a LOT better out there.

Like what?

I really liked the center mounted dash.

P71 wrote: Actually the tank it's the rear axle, which is why that put a plastic shield on them. Mine has that. I also routed my exhaust under the axle for extra room and power.

It's actually kevlar lined and tough.

They started putting them on after this..

http://www.crownvictoriasafetyalert.com/officersnames.html

btw.. about the yaris. I'd rock this.
I like the new accent hatchback but it screams yaris clone. There are plenty of other great cars out in that class, but of the ones available in the US the Yaris, Fiesta and Accent stand alone. I Like the Fiesta a lot.

And the Yaris is the best econobox currently in production IMO.

MINI, Fiesta, Mazda 2, Mazda 3, or Fit?

My gf has one. When she was shopping she asked my opinion, I told her it was my least favorite car in its class. Maybe my $0.02 is worth less than most.

On my original post, I was simply playing devil's advocate, and trying to share some of my own experiences. In light of the evidence that the WSJ article was a plant, I'll withdraw back into complete neutrality.

News in general is such a sham though, 1% information and 99% speculation and artificial drama (ironically a lot like reality TV). I read a CNN article titled, "Corvette production leaving KY?" or something similar. Body of the article: some UAW bit player said they'd like to see Corvette production at a re-opening in factory in Michigan, GM said no, its staying in KY. A title of, "Corvette production staying exactly where it is!" just isn't as newsworthy.

Did Toyota try to hide things or discredit opponents to limit collateral damage? Probably. Is the Sun Times the sole source of truth and light in this matter? Doubtful. I expect, as with most things, the truth is somewhere in between.

Flynlow wrote: In light of the evidence that the WSJ article was a plant, I'll withdraw back into complete neutrality.

what evidence? I see a bunch of uncorroborated crap that a witch hunter would call evidence and a sane person would call heresay..

96DXCivic wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

96DXCivic wrote:

Cotton wrote:

96DXCivic wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Well, to be fair, we should also apologize to Ford (Pinto and Explorer), Audi (5000), GM (trucks) etc. OTOH, it's nice to see Toyota knocked off their pedestool. Just had a Yaris rental- what a total piece of junk. Terrible car- I think people use the "reliabilty" excuse for their reason to buy such garbage. Eric

I drove a Yaris and I thought it was pretty fun.

If that's the only car you've ever driven in you life then, yeah, you may have something there.

I guess to be fair It was modified a little.

Rental, 4 speed (hello- this is the 21st century, can we say 5 or 6 speed?), 1.6l (decent enough)- terrible interior. the center dash idea is a complete fail. I hated that I had to look away from straight to see important info- that was the first thing I saw and hated. second was the horrible plastics- every single surface was hard as a rock. very uncomfortable. third was a hard to deal with driving position- but other people may like that. funny enough- a nit pick was the total manual everything- locks, mirrors, windows, everything- I guess it's the bottom of bottom line cars. What bugged me most was the lack of refinement in the powertrain. Bad idle quality, and terrible driveability in the hills- step in, step in, step in (DOWNSHIFT) back out, back out, upshift, repeat about 100 times. We fixed that problem 20 years ago- when did Toyota forget that? For thier reputation, the car was horrible. If it were a Hyundai, it would have been just bad. But T is held in such regard, the only think I could think of is people use the "reliability and reputation" as excuses for them buying complete pieces of junk. How else would this thing sell in such numbers? Eric

Yeah the interior did kinda suck but I didn't think the drivetrain was the worst thing I have driven by far but my range of cars is somewhat limited. The Yaris I drove was a five speed manual. I liked the manual everything. I was disappointed it had power steering. The only modifications were n coilovers, Ultra High Performance Summer tires (don't remember who made them) and new seats of some kind.

Honda fit ftw!

ignorant wrote: what evidence? I see a bunch of uncorroborated crap that a witch hunter would call evidence and a sane person would call heresay..

From the 3rd most unbiased news source on the planet, right behind the Daily Show and Colbert Report :

http://jalopnik.com/5588081/toyota-planted-wsj-driver-error-story-so-what?skyline=true&s=i

You're right though, "allegation" is perhaps a more appropriate word then "evidence".

alfadriver wrote:

96DXCivic wrote:

Cotton wrote:

96DXCivic wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Just had a Yaris rental- what a total piece of junk. Terrible car- I think people use the "reliabilty" excuse for their reason to buy such garbage. Eric

I drove a Yaris and I thought it was pretty fun.

Rental, 4 speed (hello- this is the 21st century, can we say 5 or 6 speed?), 1.6l (decent enough)- terrible interior. the center dash idea is a complete fail. I hated that I had to look away from straight to see important info- that was the first thing I saw and hated. second was the horrible plastics- every single surface was hard as a rock. very uncomfortable. third was a hard to deal with driving position- but other people may like that. funny enough- a nit pick was the total manual everything- locks, mirrors, windows, everything- I guess it's the bottom of bottom line cars. What bugged me most was the lack of refinement in the powertrain. Bad idle quality, and terrible driveability in the hills- step in, step in, step in (DOWNSHIFT) back out, back out, upshift, repeat about 100 times. We fixed that problem 20 years ago- when did Toyota forget that? Eric

I don't mean to argue or drag this up to go OT but what you hate in the yaris is what I like. Primarily its Toyota's weight on the cars. The yaris is around 2300 lbs, we used to own an Echo and it was 2050 or so lbs. I like the new festiva but is there a stripper available? with a normal key start and no fancy radio? I like crank window's. I like economy cars to be economy cars and not upscale. Nice interior is great and all but I would rather save the cash and weight. The dash is stupid. However there is a nice place behind the wheel for a tach... I hate the lack of center console on the echo, but you can buy aftermarket ones. A/T is moot because a stick is available. Some bushings and fabbed up short shifter could clean it up, this is no miata. It's an economy car. I have only had experience with the 1.5, which was a pretty cool engine for its size. Nothing too fancy but worked great. Still got low 40 mpg's with that ancient 4 speed auto. I know I'm not the majority speaking which is why "base stripper models" aren't that easy to come by. Just wish they were

triumph5 wrote: Through out this whole thing with Toyota, I didn't see a mention ANYWHERE of the Audi 5000 "unintentional acceleration" that was operator error, too.

If you meant that the article didn't mention the 5000, it did.

If you meant that the Audi 5000 problems were not due to operator error... they were.

The pedal linkage on Audis of that era felt a little weird. Hydraulic, almost. Possibly due to the linkages involved and the very progressive throttle opening. There was a decent bit of initial resistance, and pushing the pedal down was almost like the action on a very good piano keyboard.

So you rest your foot on the wrong pedal - it has more resistance than the screen-door spring feeling pedals in other cars, so it must be the brake! - shift into gear, car starts moving, push the "brake" harder - WHAM. "The car just took off when I hit the brake!"

Other people sued for this problem were Ford (Taurus) and Jeep (Grand Cherokee), to name two off of the top of my head. The difference, is that the American companies knew how to tell people to piss off, the foreign makes rolled over.

GameboyRMH wrote: The Ford Pinto had a real problem with the fuel tank placement, just like Crown Vics do today.

The two cars I own have the fuel tank as the rearmost item.

Heck, in one of them, the rubber fuel filler neck comes through the interior! I can easily see a rear-end collision shearing that and filling the car with fuel. Fortunately, the car is small enough that any collision that hard would have me killed, so I'm not worried.

I don't get the Crown Vic "problem". It's as safe a place as you could ask for before actually putting the tank in the cabin. There's a huge trunk full of crush space between the rear of the vehicle and the tank!

Remember back when the tank was just some afterthought that was slung under the back, with a short pipe just sort of stuck on the rear edge so you could add fuel after folding the license plate down? How did we ever manage?

I have a car with Pinto-style tank placement and the filler neck running through the interior myself, I'm not trying to be the high-and-mighty Safety Czar, but I do recognize it as a design problem.

not sure what the big deal is about the pinto, mustangs have had their tanks there since the 60's, and wranglers have had them hanging out from under the back bumper for years. what kicked ford's butt was that they got caught talking costs when the topic of recall or do nothing came up.

edit: just thought of this: the clutch pedal serves as a sort of reference as to where the other pedals should be. if you have one foot on the clutch, and your right foot is in the passenger footwell, you know you're in the wrong neighborhood. my solution? make three pedals mandatory, outlaw automatics! its genius!

Except that even the manual transmissions are two-pedal, nowadays.

Assuming that DSG style units still count as "manual".