Consumer Reports car reliabiity ratings are based on surveys turned in by their own subscribers. Not only are the return percentages low, the whole sample is self-selected from a skewed sample to begin with and therefore the results cannot be taken seriously from a statistical point of view.
Long term hard data is hard to come by. In their ads, the US truckmakers measure long term durability by number of registrations of some past distant model year, assuming durability is the same as still worthy of registering. For example, how many '92 Chevy trucks are still registered vs. Ford or Dodge, but not GMC. Not too satisfying.
I doubt the manufacturers will ever share their warranty repair data, but that would be a goldmine.
And it’s all very subjective. If the salesman does not explain to the consumer how the six disc changer works and the consumer cannot figure it out, he will oftentimes report on a survey that the changer is defective.
Opinions on durability vary tremendously, too. Some consumers expect major component failures to begin at 75-80,000 miles and gradually and measurably get worse from there, despite having performed all manufacturer recommended maintenence. Others expect no failures for the life of the vehicle as long as the oil is changed frequently. (Sterotypical American car owner idiom vs Japanese car owner idiom)
My WAG is the Hondas and Toyotas have a slight edge in defects/1000 vehicles over Ford and GM. The rest of the Japanese makes are just riding Honda and Toyota’s coattails, with some of the others about even with GM and Ford and others actually worse. YMMV
The perception that Honda, Toyota, Nissan are Japanese built is also a holdover. Most Honda’s, Nissan’s, and Toyota’s are made in the USA including the engines. Some (such as the Toyota Avalon) are designed here specifically for the US market. US workers are doing the same quality work there as should be done at Ford, GM, Chrysler. Country of origin is not as much a factor as many of the big three vehicles are made in Mexico and Canada. (I’ve had a Mexican pickup and Canadian Van in the past from the big three).
I’ve had a few years of wrench turning and IMHO there is not a lot of difference. Primary concern is the engine/transmission and that seems to be a wash. Honda exhaust systems have been very poor in the past (don’t go to the dealer for replacement with the same junk). Honda braking systems in the past have been undersized (carring light weight a little too far) with warped disks and caliper problems. Paint, suspensions, interiors are more a function of where/how you drive and who (dogs, kids, big people) is using the car. Don’t expect much in big cities with gridlock, potholes, and fenderbenders leveling the field for most cars.
I do not know which is better, but I will say that my Toyota Corrolla (1978 station wagon) is still running strong. (she knocks on wood) It has over 200K miles on it. I have driven it cross-country at least four times.
It really depends on how you define durability. An engine can be rebuilt or replaced, as can a transmission. You could even replace the wiring harness and the interior. But once the car rusts, there’s nothing you can do.
With a body-on-frame vehicle you can keep replacing body panels as long as the frame – the platform – is in good shape, but if rust eats through a unibody frame, the structural integrity of the whole unit is destroyed.
The vehicles made by the above companies certainly are most certainly Japanese. Meaning they are manufactured by a Japanese owned company.
I have had friends who have worked for both Honda in Ohio and Toyota in California. They enjoyed their jobs, said that they were well paid. They Plants in these states certainly provide a source of jobs for the region, and give many people a source of income that they might not have otherwise had. However they also say that the fact the company is Japanese is never forgotten or overlooked. The profits of these companies do not stay in the US, and very few Americans hold upper management positions within the company. Buy American
I’m not sure just when odometers started having a hundred-thousands digit, but it wasn’t really all that long ago. I’m thinking mid-80’s was when it became standard?
Prior to that, yep, odo’s rolled over at 100,000 miles. Last vestiges of the days (again, not all that long ago) when getting 100,000 miles out of a car was pretty remarkable.
True, although I could almost swear that my dad’s old '83 Civic had a hunfred-thousands digit. And of course, I’m not willing to believe a car with 2 million miles on it, somehow.
i’m sure the auto makers’ manufacturing practices have changed over the years, so looking at past performance might not be the best way to go about it. one company might have been making inferior cars back then but have been making advances as of late which would make their cars better these days.
You could very well be right - I was guessing on the date. I’m pretty sure my family’s 1976 Dodge Aspen had the old style, but the switch could have been made in the late 70’s.
Thanks for more responses. The reason I ask is because my friend is under the impression that Toyotas are sturdier and built to last longer. I have my doubts about that, and I think the posts here would indicate that there doesn’t even seem to be much anecdotal evidence that would suggest that’s true.
We don’t have a disagreement. I only point out that substantial change has been made in all car manufacturing. Previously the Japanese imported the cars, later the components, now the steels, paints, seats, and most other elements are sourced here in the USA. The profits “and taxes” stay here for all the subcontracted portions. Employees pay taxes and spend here. Similar to GM, Ford, and German Chrysler activities in other countries. Auto manufacturing is perhaps the most global of all activities. I buy American for quality if available, favor the Japanese and Taiwan over Chinese for some items, European for other items. Competition has improved the breed in many areas.
Steve
