Toyota finally comes clean...
- Thread starter Da Game
- Start date
- Status
Lat I checked Toyota was not creating shell companies to hide illegal or questionable accounting practices!Enron was not really growing it was a Paper Tiger. Toyota's growth is real and tangable. According to the latest AutoNews they need to build one new production plant per year for the next 8-10 years if I rember correctly to keep up with domestic demand int he USA. Currently their production capability is only 55.4% of the actual demand. You do not see Toyota sitting on on months worth of vechiles. You do not see them giveing deep discounts on their vechiles either. It is so much harder to sell a Toyota when you have to work the numbers because the discounts just are not their. So instead you have to build value and relationships with the client. You also have to take residuals into account. The fact that Toyota sells everything they can build at MSRP or darn close says a lot!
Lat I checked Toyota was not creating shell companies to hide illegal or questionable accounting practices!Enron was not really growing it was a Paper Tiger. Toyota's growth is real and tangable. According to the latest AutoNews they need to build one new production plant per year for the next 8-10 years if I rember correctly to keep up with domestic demand int he USA. Currently their production capability is only 55.4% of the actual demand. You do not see Toyota sitting on on months worth of vechiles. You do not see them giveing deep discounts on their vechiles either. It is so much harder to sell a Toyota when you have to work the numbers because the discounts just are not their. So instead you have to build value and relationships with the client. You also have to take residuals into account. The fact that Toyota sells everything they can build at MSRP or darn close says a lot!
Quote:
How in the world did we get in a knock-down,drag-out fisticuffs about Enron? Talk about chasing rabbits.
Because someone actually had the audacity to compare Toyota to Enron. I'm not gonna sit idle and let that total steaming pile of horse turds go unanswered.
You Toyota haters can keep to your propaganda about how Toyota is screwing everyone over and how they're in such trouble, when they clearly are not.
Will you come out with equal force against other manufacturers who have screwed their customers over ten times worse than Toyota ever has? Will you go into such detail about the class action lawsuits against GM over intake gaskets and piston slap problems? Well, monkey's may one day fly from my butt, but I doubt it.
I'll ask the question again: what has GM done for people with continual intake gasket problems? Nothing. Did GM extend people's warranties to 100,000 miles and replace their engines like Toyota did? No they did not. Toyota on the other hand, the company that's allegedly screwing those stupid customers over, DID.
Quote:
It started off with the GM 3.8L as the preferred upgrade ,but now people are using the GM 4.3L as well !
Ha ha ha ha.
People put 350s in Ford T-buckets. I guess Ford T-buckets suck.
People transplant 4.3Ls, Chevy, and Ford V-8s in various Jeeps, Scouts, and Land Rovers. Does Jeep, Internatonal Scout, and Land Rover suck then?
Heck, I've seen Mustangs with Chevy V-8s and Camaroes with Ford V-8s.
Point is, implication like you're trying to do.................what am I trying to say............the well was drained about 10 posts ago.
Quote:
May I suggest a course in basic blueprint reading 101. It may help you see the error in your statements regarding tolerance. A little hint.... dimensions and tolerance.
Hirev ,
You got it wrong again !
Read the original post - its the term that the Settlement description uses - not originated here . You also missed the quote marks . I did offer to explain it and described it as overlytight tolerances stuff .
Yes , I am aware that one of the many ,many design defects on both engines is that the rather flimsy , VII /basestock shearing , ideal sludge precursor producing scissor gear ( helical cut ) cam drive on each cylinder head has a clearance dimension that is too tight esp. in regards to SJ/SL and toyotas " pick a number " oil change intervals .
Are we in agreement on all that ?
Now the interesting question is why that term instead of .....hmm .
Are we also in agreement as to your other posts errors ?
Last edited:
Yea , but how many of the other ones have done up to 5 sets of Headgaskets ( some people will persist ) with a couple of intake manifold gaskets x2 thrown in .
BTW , what exactly do you consider OEM on a " Ford T BUCKET "
I don't think any of them **** , I just know and I think you do too , that 3VZ-E WILL NOT keep a Headgasket on , no matter what , esp now that they are " fully seasoned " .
BTW , what exactly do you consider OEM on a " Ford T BUCKET "
I don't think any of them **** , I just know and I think you do too , that 3VZ-E WILL NOT keep a Headgasket on , no matter what , esp now that they are " fully seasoned " .
Last edited:
They can't screw you if you don't buy from them. (Whoever you believe them to be.)
Since I've not been screwed by Toyota, but have experienced various levels of screwing by GM and Ford, doesn't it make sense that I'd no longer buy GM and Ford cars?
My impression is that MORE folks have been screwed, percentage wise, by buying Ford or GM than have by buying Toyota.
Since my experiences with Toyota have been favorable compared to my personal experiences with GM and Ford, they WON me as a customer.
I gave GM and Ford from 1982 until probably 2002.
It seems there are millions like me in the US that grew tired of the problems they've experienced.
When I compare my last two work cars here is what I get when I look at fuel and maintenance/repair costs.
1987 Buick LeSabre with the bulletproof 3.8L V6: I have records from 84,422 to 130,017 miles for those two items
Total spent to travel that 45595 mile distance $6511.43
Maintenance and repairs $3991.50
Fuel 2519.92
Cost/Mile
M & R = $0.0875
Fuel = $0.0552
Avg Fuel Economy over that period was 23.1 MPG in combined city/highway driving
Total Fuel consumed: 1974 gallons (rounded to nearest gallon)
Avg Fuel Price $1.276/gallon
============================================================
1994 Geo Prizm
Records from 105966 to most recent fillup at 200463, or 94497 miles.
I have records for all costs, but will only examine the same records that I have for the Buick.
M & R costs $2657.05
Fuel Costs $5750.71
M&R cost/mile $0.0281
Fuel Costs/mile $0.0608
Avg MPG 31.8 MPG
Total Fuel Used 2972 gallons
Avg Fuel Price $1.935
==============================================================
So, economically, which is better?
The Geo (Toyota Corolla, with Chevy badge on the grill) which almost costs less to operate per mile compared to just the maintenance of the Buick even with higher average fuel prices, or the Buick.
To me, looking at these numbers, it doesn't make sense for me to buy a domestic car, even one as well maintained as my grandmothers Buick, compared to the off the street Geo Prizm.
These numbers speak volumes to me, and are representative of my experiences with both GM and strangly enough a GM badged Toyota.
Since I've not been screwed by Toyota, but have experienced various levels of screwing by GM and Ford, doesn't it make sense that I'd no longer buy GM and Ford cars?
My impression is that MORE folks have been screwed, percentage wise, by buying Ford or GM than have by buying Toyota.
Since my experiences with Toyota have been favorable compared to my personal experiences with GM and Ford, they WON me as a customer.
I gave GM and Ford from 1982 until probably 2002.
It seems there are millions like me in the US that grew tired of the problems they've experienced.
When I compare my last two work cars here is what I get when I look at fuel and maintenance/repair costs.
1987 Buick LeSabre with the bulletproof 3.8L V6: I have records from 84,422 to 130,017 miles for those two items
Total spent to travel that 45595 mile distance $6511.43
Maintenance and repairs $3991.50
Fuel 2519.92
Cost/Mile
M & R = $0.0875
Fuel = $0.0552
Avg Fuel Economy over that period was 23.1 MPG in combined city/highway driving
Total Fuel consumed: 1974 gallons (rounded to nearest gallon)
Avg Fuel Price $1.276/gallon
============================================================
1994 Geo Prizm
Records from 105966 to most recent fillup at 200463, or 94497 miles.
I have records for all costs, but will only examine the same records that I have for the Buick.
M & R costs $2657.05
Fuel Costs $5750.71
M&R cost/mile $0.0281
Fuel Costs/mile $0.0608
Avg MPG 31.8 MPG
Total Fuel Used 2972 gallons
Avg Fuel Price $1.935
==============================================================
So, economically, which is better?
The Geo (Toyota Corolla, with Chevy badge on the grill) which almost costs less to operate per mile compared to just the maintenance of the Buick even with higher average fuel prices, or the Buick.
To me, looking at these numbers, it doesn't make sense for me to buy a domestic car, even one as well maintained as my grandmothers Buick, compared to the off the street Geo Prizm.
These numbers speak volumes to me, and are representative of my experiences with both GM and strangly enough a GM badged Toyota.
Every business model I have every known has grown, peaked and declined. I will refrain from describing you, or anyone else as dumb, or your thoughts as a pile of horse turds. That's not why we're here. That isn't the spirit of these forums.
Consider this:
Thirty years ago, GM was the dominant player in the automobile industry worldwide. The Japanese, including Toyota, Nissan (then called Datsun in the US), Honda, and Fuji (Subaru) experienced a brief day in the sun in the wake of the 1973 fuel crisis, but quickly receeded. GM introduced its new, and very good, downsized cars in '77 and '78, and looked pretty indomitable.
Where is GM now?
My FIL has thousands of shares of Ford, bought prior to his retirement, in happier times. Where is Ford now?
To suggest that Toyota may have passed its peak should be considered a possibility to discuss. Toyota is no more exempt from the obsolesence of its business model than were GM and Ford.
Enron had a number of years where it could do no wrong. The deceptive accounting, even fraud, came later. The whole enterprise colapsed when the facade could no longer be sustained.
Finally, we have owned one Toyota, a 1967 Corona 4dr sedan. It was a decent and entertaining car in every respect. It had the fairly unusual 2R 4cyl. I regret having sold the car, since it would be a facinating example of a pretty early Toyota.
Consider this:
Thirty years ago, GM was the dominant player in the automobile industry worldwide. The Japanese, including Toyota, Nissan (then called Datsun in the US), Honda, and Fuji (Subaru) experienced a brief day in the sun in the wake of the 1973 fuel crisis, but quickly receeded. GM introduced its new, and very good, downsized cars in '77 and '78, and looked pretty indomitable.
Where is GM now?
My FIL has thousands of shares of Ford, bought prior to his retirement, in happier times. Where is Ford now?
To suggest that Toyota may have passed its peak should be considered a possibility to discuss. Toyota is no more exempt from the obsolesence of its business model than were GM and Ford.
Enron had a number of years where it could do no wrong. The deceptive accounting, even fraud, came later. The whole enterprise colapsed when the facade could no longer be sustained.
Finally, we have owned one Toyota, a 1967 Corona 4dr sedan. It was a decent and entertaining car in every respect. It had the fairly unusual 2R 4cyl. I regret having sold the car, since it would be a facinating example of a pretty early Toyota.
The Toyota V8 noise on start up. Take off the serpentine belt and start the engine. You might be surprised that you don't hear the noise. It's that hugh fan and thermostat switch that just might be the ticking noise during warm up. It was on mine.
OK .
Lets use your post to get back on topic .
And lets use your post just as it is with no attempt to ascertain GMs responsibility here . What I mean is ,lets just assume that they were responsible and no one else .
So let me ask you a question . Given how you just posted , how would you feel if you were one of the many who had who spent 10,000 - 12,600 on a Sienna engine replacement at less than 60000 miles of use ? Are you aware some have failed more than once? Are you aware some are now reporting headgasket problems ?
See , with your experience , you could be atleast emphasising with these fellow toyota owners people who are having a much rougher experience with toyota .
Of course , at least now they look to have been vindicated .
I looked around a little today , no sign of a class action settlement on your 87 3.8L engine on any vehicle . I don't know , maybe I missed it , but I don't recall one either .
Well , lets get back more directly on topic . How many of the 7.5 million people in this do you think are going to reach a conclusion like you did ?
How many do you think that 7.5 million might be missing ?
Lets use your post to get back on topic .
And lets use your post just as it is with no attempt to ascertain GMs responsibility here . What I mean is ,lets just assume that they were responsible and no one else .
So let me ask you a question . Given how you just posted , how would you feel if you were one of the many who had who spent 10,000 - 12,600 on a Sienna engine replacement at less than 60000 miles of use ? Are you aware some have failed more than once? Are you aware some are now reporting headgasket problems ?
See , with your experience , you could be atleast emphasising with these fellow toyota owners people who are having a much rougher experience with toyota .
Of course , at least now they look to have been vindicated .
I looked around a little today , no sign of a class action settlement on your 87 3.8L engine on any vehicle . I don't know , maybe I missed it , but I don't recall one either .
Well , lets get back more directly on topic . How many of the 7.5 million people in this do you think are going to reach a conclusion like you did ?
How many do you think that 7.5 million might be missing ?
OK .
Lets use your post to get back on topic .
And lets use your post just as it is with no attempt to ascertain GMs responsibility here . What I mean is ,lets just assume that they were responsible and no one else .
So let me ask you a question . Given how you just posted , how would you feel if you were one of the many who had who spent 10,000 - 12,600 on a Sienna engine replacement at less than 60000 miles of use ? Are you aware some have failed more than once? Are you aware some are now reporting headgasket problems ?
See , with your experience , you could be atleast emphasising with these fellow toyota owners people who are having a much rougher experience with toyota .
Of course , at least now they look to have been vindicated .
I looked around a little today , no sign of a class action settlement on your 87 3.8L engine on any vehicle . I don't know , maybe I missed it , but I don't recall one either .
Well , lets get back more directly on topic . How many of the 7.5 million people in this do you think are going to reach a conclusion like you did ?
How many do you think that 7.5 million might be missing ?
Lets use your post to get back on topic .
And lets use your post just as it is with no attempt to ascertain GMs responsibility here . What I mean is ,lets just assume that they were responsible and no one else .
So let me ask you a question . Given how you just posted , how would you feel if you were one of the many who had who spent 10,000 - 12,600 on a Sienna engine replacement at less than 60000 miles of use ? Are you aware some have failed more than once? Are you aware some are now reporting headgasket problems ?
See , with your experience , you could be atleast emphasising with these fellow toyota owners people who are having a much rougher experience with toyota .
Of course , at least now they look to have been vindicated .
I looked around a little today , no sign of a class action settlement on your 87 3.8L engine on any vehicle . I don't know , maybe I missed it , but I don't recall one either .
Well , lets get back more directly on topic . How many of the 7.5 million people in this do you think are going to reach a conclusion like you did ?
How many do you think that 7.5 million might be missing ?
javacontour ,
OK .
Lets use your post to get back on topic .
And lets use your post just as it is with no attempt to ascertain GMs responsibility here . What I mean is ,lets just assume that they were responsible and no one else .
So let me ask you a question . Given how you just posted , how would you feel if you were one of the many who had who spent 10,000 - 12,600 on a Sienna engine replacement at less than 60000 miles of use ? Are you aware some have failed more than once? Are you aware some are now reporting headgasket problems ?
See , with your experience , you could be at least emphasising with these fellow toyota owners people who are having a much rougher experience with toyota .
Of course , at least now they look to have been vindicated .
I looked around a little today , no sign of a class action settlement on your 87 3.8L engine on any vehicle . I don't know , maybe I missed it , but I don't recall one either .
Well , lets get back more directly on topic . How many of the 7.5 million people in this do you think are going to reach a conclusion like you but did directed at toyota ?
How many do you think that 7.5 million might be missing ?
OK .
Lets use your post to get back on topic .
And lets use your post just as it is with no attempt to ascertain GMs responsibility here . What I mean is ,lets just assume that they were responsible and no one else .
So let me ask you a question . Given how you just posted , how would you feel if you were one of the many who had who spent 10,000 - 12,600 on a Sienna engine replacement at less than 60000 miles of use ? Are you aware some have failed more than once? Are you aware some are now reporting headgasket problems ?
See , with your experience , you could be at least emphasising with these fellow toyota owners people who are having a much rougher experience with toyota .
Of course , at least now they look to have been vindicated .
I looked around a little today , no sign of a class action settlement on your 87 3.8L engine on any vehicle . I don't know , maybe I missed it , but I don't recall one either .
Well , lets get back more directly on topic . How many of the 7.5 million people in this do you think are going to reach a conclusion like you but did directed at toyota ?
How many do you think that 7.5 million might be missing ?
I see the sludge thing differently than hard mechanical failures like the trannies in my LeSabre and my ex-wife's Sunbird, or the 3.8L that jumped timing.
I'm pretty sure that Toyota's owners manual recommends that the owner check the oil at EVERY fuel stop.
This is not unique to Toyota, I'm certain every car maker recommends this or at least a weekly check.
I've seen Charlene's writings about her Toyota van and have followed her story and watched from a distance her crusade to have Toyota make this right.
Yet when I asked her if she followed the manual to a T, including all those checks, she evades the question.
Do I feel bad for the owners of those vehicles? I sure do. I do believe there was a problem.
However, the difference is that I believe, had every one of those owners been following the recommended maintenance schedule, they would have noticed their oil level dropping.
From what I've read, the sludged engines had increased oil consumption, as well as sludge.
There was no way to detect the timing set failure or the failures of the automatic transmissions of either of those cars by following the service schedule posted by GM.
If I had recurrent bad experiences with Toyota, then I will look elsewhere.
I try to base judgments on data. The data I've seen indicate that there is a greater number of problems per 100 vehicles when you look at GM or Ford compared to Toyota.
Notice, I've not said that Toyota's are problem free. The numbers are quite close.
However, given my desire to have the minimum amount of trouble possible, the data indicates that my chances are better with a Toyota than with a GM or Ford.
My data indicates that my Toyota was not perfect. It does indicate than so far, my Toyota designed and jointly built with GM at the NUMMI plant Geo Prizm is far less expensive to maintain and repair than the Buick was.
I empathize with anyone who has car issues.
However, that is tempered by noting that when I'm at a service station, filling up. probably 24 out of 25 times, I'm the only one checking under the hood.
What does my data have to do with empathy for folks who are having problems? Or better yet, why do you draw the false conclusion that I don't have empathy for them? You certainly cannot draw such a conclusion from what I've written.
If folks have a bad experience with Toyota, Honda, GM or Ford, they should try to get it resolved, and if not, choose another carmaker and call it a day.
I'm sharing what works for me. That doesn't mean that GM, Ford or anyone else, even Renault is not a better solution for someone else.
I've simply provided the rationale and the data that supports my decision.
This is not about anyone else, it's about my experience, and how I spend my money and time.
For the most part GM and to a lesser extent Ford and Chrysler had their chance with me from 81 (when I got my license) until 2004 when I purchased my used 95 T-Bird.
The T-Bird was also under $0.03/mile to maintain and repair, but squeeked and clunked so bad that I didn't want to keep it anymore. I had the T-Bird for 34912 miles and it was dead even with the Geo at 0.0281/mile to maintain and repair. The difference was my judgment based on soundness of the 175K miles Prizm vs the 142K mile T-Bird on 12/31/2005 when I sold the T-Bird and bought my Scion tC.
I look at Oilbabe's 2002 Camry that ticked over 150K miles last week and the only repair in that time has been a torn CV boot that I caught during an oil change and had the boot changed at 100K miles when she took it to her dealer for a transaxle and cooling system flush.
Other than tires and oil changes and filters, that has been it.
She doesn't keep records, but I'll bet it's even less / mile than any other of my vehicles cited here.
So, while I feel bad for anyone who has car trouble, I still believe a lot of it is self inflicted. That belief is reinforced every time I stop for gas and watch how my fellow motorists treat their cars, regardless of who made the car.
I'm pretty sure that Toyota's owners manual recommends that the owner check the oil at EVERY fuel stop.
This is not unique to Toyota, I'm certain every car maker recommends this or at least a weekly check.
I've seen Charlene's writings about her Toyota van and have followed her story and watched from a distance her crusade to have Toyota make this right.
Yet when I asked her if she followed the manual to a T, including all those checks, she evades the question.
Do I feel bad for the owners of those vehicles? I sure do. I do believe there was a problem.
However, the difference is that I believe, had every one of those owners been following the recommended maintenance schedule, they would have noticed their oil level dropping.
From what I've read, the sludged engines had increased oil consumption, as well as sludge.
There was no way to detect the timing set failure or the failures of the automatic transmissions of either of those cars by following the service schedule posted by GM.
If I had recurrent bad experiences with Toyota, then I will look elsewhere.
I try to base judgments on data. The data I've seen indicate that there is a greater number of problems per 100 vehicles when you look at GM or Ford compared to Toyota.
Notice, I've not said that Toyota's are problem free. The numbers are quite close.
However, given my desire to have the minimum amount of trouble possible, the data indicates that my chances are better with a Toyota than with a GM or Ford.
My data indicates that my Toyota was not perfect. It does indicate than so far, my Toyota designed and jointly built with GM at the NUMMI plant Geo Prizm is far less expensive to maintain and repair than the Buick was.
I empathize with anyone who has car issues.
However, that is tempered by noting that when I'm at a service station, filling up. probably 24 out of 25 times, I'm the only one checking under the hood.
What does my data have to do with empathy for folks who are having problems? Or better yet, why do you draw the false conclusion that I don't have empathy for them? You certainly cannot draw such a conclusion from what I've written.
If folks have a bad experience with Toyota, Honda, GM or Ford, they should try to get it resolved, and if not, choose another carmaker and call it a day.
I'm sharing what works for me. That doesn't mean that GM, Ford or anyone else, even Renault is not a better solution for someone else.
I've simply provided the rationale and the data that supports my decision.
This is not about anyone else, it's about my experience, and how I spend my money and time.
For the most part GM and to a lesser extent Ford and Chrysler had their chance with me from 81 (when I got my license) until 2004 when I purchased my used 95 T-Bird.
The T-Bird was also under $0.03/mile to maintain and repair, but squeeked and clunked so bad that I didn't want to keep it anymore. I had the T-Bird for 34912 miles and it was dead even with the Geo at 0.0281/mile to maintain and repair. The difference was my judgment based on soundness of the 175K miles Prizm vs the 142K mile T-Bird on 12/31/2005 when I sold the T-Bird and bought my Scion tC.
I look at Oilbabe's 2002 Camry that ticked over 150K miles last week and the only repair in that time has been a torn CV boot that I caught during an oil change and had the boot changed at 100K miles when she took it to her dealer for a transaxle and cooling system flush.
Other than tires and oil changes and filters, that has been it.
She doesn't keep records, but I'll bet it's even less / mile than any other of my vehicles cited here.
So, while I feel bad for anyone who has car trouble, I still believe a lot of it is self inflicted. That belief is reinforced every time I stop for gas and watch how my fellow motorists treat their cars, regardless of who made the car.
Have you ever had anyone ask you if you're having car trouble when you've been checking things under the hood?
I have. Kinda ironic since I'm trying to PREVENT car trouble by checking things under the hood.
No, but I have pointed out to folks a low tire or other things.
If I have a low tire, I notice it. I don't understand how some folks can be so oblivious to these sorts of things.
But they are.
They probably feel the same way about how I don't always notice moods and body language of other folks...
If I have a low tire, I notice it. I don't understand how some folks can be so oblivious to these sorts of things.
But they are.
They probably feel the same way about how I don't always notice moods and body language of other folks...
Well , Sure is interesting to try and figure out how much this is going to cost in addition to what they have spent already , including the spin/disappearing information campaign .
Looks like at a min. , an additional 200-250-300 million-to who really knows how much above that .
That said , if 1 ) accepted and approved as purposed by toyota and 2 ) if no other group who might of opted out takes it further - really to its rightful conclusion , then 3 ) this is actually an enormous , undeserved victory for toyota .
How can that be ?
Well , its the difference between a costly and unneccessary , yet limited tactical defeat versus having a devastating , almost firm destoying strategic defeat .
This group had the crowbar they needed for making that kind of strategic defeat apossibility . If nothing else , that crowbar option properly employed , should have resulted in a broader settlement , covering more people and more of the actual losses suffered .
If I was a plaintiff or the judge , and all this happened this way , I wouldn't stop there .
Not for spite , or for personal gain , but because its the right thing to do .Also because toyota has desperately needed the big correction that a crowbar so uniquely provides for a very , very long time . They are now so large that the whole industry desperately needs this to happen as well .
So I would keep going because it would also have long lasting positive repercussions and would improve all thing automotive for years to come . And , because left undone , the reverse is also true .
So what is the crowbar and how would you use it ?
The crowbar is the actual defective engine designs themselves , how their defects interact to produce sludge and what this implicitly reveals about engine design and development during this time at toyota . You use this to gain legal access within the firm thru the courts , open the doors and shed some light .
Now that right there , would drive them nuts , and they have a lot of reasons to want to avoid scrutiny . They also have a peculiar form of arrogance , which can be used to advantage as well .
So just the outline of the crowbar - ie the defectively/incorrectly designed/incorrectly integrated componets would look like this ;
1 ) Scissor gear cam drive ( internal ) . Oil VII destoying/basestock " bruising "
design choice .
2 ) Cylinderheads (by design hot walled ) - water jacket shape ,size ,location . Overall functional area(s) assignment and group geometry - metal temp - oiltemp " maps " esp . near/over exhaust port/valve area , cam bucket areas in general and a few other choice spots as well .
3 ) Engine block short skirt design with even shorter ,too small , poorly located cooling jackets . Uneven/undesirable temp. thru out , basically both too hot and too " cool " .
4 ) Headgasket material and design and sealing performance esp during warm up and high load/high temp .
5 ) Piston/ring assembly specifics (short land most import ) esp given other choices
6 ) Oil circulation/system charactoristics
7 ) Fuel Delivery schedule - both " lean " and " rich " areas of the A/F map .
8 ) PCV system/baffles/valve size/ " flow schedule "
9 ) Oil maintenance schedule/definitions
10 ) Misc. other depending on engine ,and date of manufacture , primarily revolving around clamping force issues for the headgasket .
Also some aspects of CH - spark advance schedule - octane requirements as integrated .
Looks like at a min. , an additional 200-250-300 million-to who really knows how much above that .
That said , if 1 ) accepted and approved as purposed by toyota and 2 ) if no other group who might of opted out takes it further - really to its rightful conclusion , then 3 ) this is actually an enormous , undeserved victory for toyota .
How can that be ?
Well , its the difference between a costly and unneccessary , yet limited tactical defeat versus having a devastating , almost firm destoying strategic defeat .
This group had the crowbar they needed for making that kind of strategic defeat apossibility . If nothing else , that crowbar option properly employed , should have resulted in a broader settlement , covering more people and more of the actual losses suffered .
If I was a plaintiff or the judge , and all this happened this way , I wouldn't stop there .
Not for spite , or for personal gain , but because its the right thing to do .Also because toyota has desperately needed the big correction that a crowbar so uniquely provides for a very , very long time . They are now so large that the whole industry desperately needs this to happen as well .
So I would keep going because it would also have long lasting positive repercussions and would improve all thing automotive for years to come . And , because left undone , the reverse is also true .
So what is the crowbar and how would you use it ?
The crowbar is the actual defective engine designs themselves , how their defects interact to produce sludge and what this implicitly reveals about engine design and development during this time at toyota . You use this to gain legal access within the firm thru the courts , open the doors and shed some light .
Now that right there , would drive them nuts , and they have a lot of reasons to want to avoid scrutiny . They also have a peculiar form of arrogance , which can be used to advantage as well .
So just the outline of the crowbar - ie the defectively/incorrectly designed/incorrectly integrated componets would look like this ;
1 ) Scissor gear cam drive ( internal ) . Oil VII destoying/basestock " bruising "
2 ) Cylinderheads (by design hot walled ) - water jacket shape ,size ,location . Overall functional area(s) assignment and group geometry - metal temp - oiltemp " maps " esp . near/over exhaust port/valve area , cam bucket areas in general and a few other choice spots as well .
3 ) Engine block short skirt design with even shorter ,too small , poorly located cooling jackets . Uneven/undesirable temp. thru out , basically both too hot and too " cool " .
4 ) Headgasket material and design and sealing performance esp during warm up and high load/high temp .
5 ) Piston/ring assembly specifics (short land most import ) esp given other choices
6 ) Oil circulation/system charactoristics
7 ) Fuel Delivery schedule - both " lean " and " rich " areas of the A/F map .
8 ) PCV system/baffles/valve size/ " flow schedule "
9 ) Oil maintenance schedule/definitions
10 ) Misc. other depending on engine ,and date of manufacture , primarily revolving around clamping force issues for the headgasket .
Also some aspects of CH - spark advance schedule - octane requirements as integrated .
Quote:
Well , Sure is interesting to try and figure out how much this is going to cost in addition to what they have spent already , including the spin/disappearing information campaign .
Looks like at a min. , an additional 200-250-300 million-to who really knows how much above that .
Well ,it now appears the previous estimated range was way low .
NYT via Detroit News says Billions and I asked around today , and they are correct - at the least 1.2 billion + - maybe alot more .
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070207/AUTO01/702070349/1148
Pastmaster posted this earlier today ,he deserves the credit , although I think we can use it here .
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=818898
Excerpted and comments added in parenthesis and bold . Plain bold is original text .
Cheryl Gerber / New York Times
"We had our suspicions up that this isn't an unusual case," says Jeff Meckstroth, a New Orleans stockbroker.........................................................
...................................................Jeff Meckstroth's dispute with Toyota Motor Corp. might have ended quietly on March 1, 2001, when an arbitration panel unanimously agreed that Toyota was liable for the damage to the engine of his 2-year-old $37,000 Lexus RX300 sport utility vehicle.
Instead, it escalated. ( toyota wouldn't pay incidental expenses ) As the two Toyota representatives packed up their papers, they referred casually to other, similar cases they were handling. "Then we had our suspicions up that this isn't an unusual case, that Lexus knows about the problem, and has formed a response -- just deny , deny , deny , ( like here ) " said Meckstroth, a 47-year-old New Orleans stockbroker. "We decided to sue."
( Also didn't like that " passionate pursuit of perfection " after he found out what it means - for real )
His case mushroomed into a class-action suit representing prior and current owners of nearly 4 ( see how Ts been spinning this number ? 3.2 then around /just under 3.5 and now .... ) million Toyota and Lexus vehicles that may have (or may soon/later ) suffered engine damage due to thickening oil, or sludge......................................
...............................................................
With engine replacements costing as much as ( 12,600 ) $10,000, the final tab could run into the billions . But the (revelations and unanswered questions bring their own ) damage to Toyota's reputation ( and will ) might be even more costly for the Japanese automaker................................................................................................................
..................................But the high-profile case is the latest in a series of recalls and other signs suggesting that the Japanese automaker's quality controls aren't foolproof. ( should read :aren't proofed by a fool or yep , no proof even for a fool )
Here comes the spin . Edmonds shutdown Charlene Blake and Toyota Owners Untied For A Resolution and then shortly there after partnered with - and are on toyotas homepage - you decide .
"It would be accurate to say that there have been enough issues with Toyota in the past couple of years that they don't have the spotless ( imaginary ) image they had a couple of years ago," said Karl Brauer, editor in chief of Edmunds.com, an automotive research Web site.
But he adds that problems at Toyota attract a disproportionate amount of attention because of the automaker's ( carefully crafted ) sterling reputation for quality. "Most companies wouldn't get noticed for these problems."
Further complicating matters, sludge issues aren't clear-cut. ( Yes they are on these two toyota motors ) Excessive heat, sediment, poor oil condition or a combination of those factors may thicken the oil. In engines with very narrow passages, small amounts of sludge may get stuck, causing damage...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................"There are reasons to believe that the engine design could be contributing to it, but there are also reasons to think that lack of maintenance or proper customer care is contributing," Brauer said. "Everything I've read indicates something kind of in between."
See previous post outline .
Gary Gambel, an attorney at Murphy, Rogers, Sloss & Gambel in New Orleans, argued that Toyota's engines had a ( have numerous ) defect ( s ) giving them a propensity to develop sludge.
But "the terms of the settlement and the settlement itself have no finding of defect in the product,"Toyota spokesman Xavier Dominicis said. "They're not saying these engines are predisposed to sludge." ( No but your billion $ plus settlement offer sure sez so )
Toyota does not expect ( whens the last time their expecter was any good on engines any way ? ) the rate at which customers are coming in for engine repairs in those vehicles or for compensation to change as a result of the settlement, Dominicis said.( Yea maybe - I DOUBT IT , but either way , now you have to make good . ALSO GOTTA CATCH UP )
Toyota remains among the quality leaders by any ( rapidly dwindling and somewhat suspicious ) measure, but some question whether it can continue to grow ( at all ) rapidly and maintain top ( any ) standards. Its sales targets suggest Toyota may overtake General Motors Corp. to become the world's No. 1 automaker this year.
In a recent interview, Yuki Funo, Toyota's highest-level U.S. Toyota executive, said he thought Toyota had "come through the worst period." ( Nope . Three more to go more likely )
He noted that the company's U.S.only U.S. recalls were lower last year than in 2005. ( Because of delaying latest balljoint recall + other ? ) "We are on the right track to get our arms around this issue ( you ever try and hug a gorilla ? ) , and I think we should see better signs ( the heck with the signs - I'd start with balljoints and engines asap) in the future," Funo said.
( Whole industry dropped from about 17.9 M TO approx. 10.7 M . toyota didnt not match this improvement )
Most experts say it takes years for brands to lose -- and restore -- their reputations.
"The sludge issue was a significant blow," said Art Spinella, president of CNW Marketing Research Inc. in Bandon, Ore.
"Toyota's in the position that GM was in back in the 1970s.
A lot of people were buying GM products in the '70s because they were GM products, but they had fractures at the edges.
It took 15 years before GM started to suffer from that long-term negative word-of-mouth."
At Toyota, he said, "it's going to hurt them if they don't turn it around." ( Yep )
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As bad as these higher numbers are there was much more at stake .
Let me do it this way ; ( my opinion only )
I would gone after not only the two specific engines named , but also the internal/external information on another 3-4 engines specifically and all that they have ever produced in general or in other words , in regards to across the board design shortcomings .
Its also relevant to consider any engine that Yamaha had anything to do with - both toyota and non toyota .
Of course these engines didn't come about in a vacuum so I'd be looking at the entire history of the company , from before they started manufacturing anything automotive .
Most relevant would be their automotive " business practices " since slightly before Honda decided to produce automobiles . And obvously what they did from about 1982 forward .
As I said it didn't happen in a vacuum , so their decision making activities/engineering processes in regards to the last two years of recalls would be desirable to bring in as well . That in turn ,brings up the 20 years before that .
Why try and do all this ?
Because if you did , I believe its very likely you could establish that these defective engine programs were really the result of business as usual - with a couple of new twists thrown in .
I also believe you could then try and demonstrate a consistent long term pattern of unsavory and negligent - even possibly criminal behaivor and business practices .
Once even the possibility of this was even in play , I then think at the very least a stronger , fairer , settlement was possible.
Well , they were in a biiiig hurry when these engines were pushed thru .
Now some of that was good business sense , some of it was ego ( false - the worst kind ) , some of it was greed and some of it were the problems they were starting to experience with the then current engine designs - recently introduced .
Besides , it was ..... in a sense....... Hondas fault .
BTW , I'm getting a little proud at how the forum handled all of todays attempts to get everybody off track . Ignore them - all of them .
Did you catch that dog and pony show about the honda odometer ?
Last edited:
This thread is so enlightning. Toyota can build an inferior prodcut, but yet we need to make excuses for them. Geez, people get over it. Toyota doesn't need any cheerleaders. Neither do any of the other auto manufacturers.
I just heard a radio commercial where the toyota dealership is offering factory incentives on there vehicles. Imagine that! Yep, $2500 for one of them. Don't remember the name, as when I hear Toyota, I don't pay any attention. Their vehicles just don't interest me. Evidently some people here worship them as if they own stock in the company.
I think the Enron vs. Toyota comparison was very acceptable. Some Toyota excuse maker made the revenue comment. Shouldn't start a fire that you can't control if you have biased arguments to make. Bottom line, Toyota is not a superior car company.
I just heard a radio commercial where the toyota dealership is offering factory incentives on there vehicles. Imagine that! Yep, $2500 for one of them. Don't remember the name, as when I hear Toyota, I don't pay any attention. Their vehicles just don't interest me. Evidently some people here worship them as if they own stock in the company.
I think the Enron vs. Toyota comparison was very acceptable. Some Toyota excuse maker made the revenue comment. Shouldn't start a fire that you can't control if you have biased arguments to make. Bottom line, Toyota is not a superior car company.
You know MC5W20 ,
One thing I always try and keep in mind , is that behind every vehicle , and behind every manufacturer are a whole lot of working people doing the best they can with what they are given to work with .
I keep that in mind no matter what I'm posting ,for or against or neither . I also through age and experience really don't have a lot of preferences left or places I fly my flag .That said , I do not like nor do I think its right what happens to a lot of brands here . Each one has stepped in it with both legs in buckets up to their knees and still tried to walk up the aisle as if nothing is wrong . Each one with one exception lays out considerable money on goodwill programs to cover some of their customer induced mistakes , and then turns around and gets stiff on one of their regulars . Go figure .
You will find as you go thru life its best not to over determine things when its not called for - but that doesn't mean being afraid to call it like it is .
I think part of what goes on here is somewhat inevitable ,and a bigger chunk is very deliberate and part of something else . Or maybe some people have too much time on their hands at their dealership . Either way , its sometimes way out of control . Want to know whats happening in the world of toyota ? - go to a toyota forum - see what they're talking about . Right now , they are definitely talking .
One of the problems this industry has always had is that of the lowest common denominator . If somebody succeeds doing it dirty , just like with kids , the next thing you know they all start doing it . Unfortunately , I THINK ITS ALREADY STARTED .
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky