Topic: Toyota / Lexus Tidbits

[drederick]

4 dudes come to a 4 way stop exactly at the same time.  One in a Ram, another in a F150, another in a Chevy and then a Tundra; all identical trim levels.  Who proceeds first, besides the guy with the fastest unit

The correct answer is the guy driving the unit with the highest resale value and the vehicle that will last the longest with the least amount of repair.  HINT: he is also the guy that paid the most and usually can afford it. 

The correct answer is obvious - it is the Tundra! As a Toyota it more than likely would be first due to UA, right? Probably the owner didn't get the under engineered, badly manufactured, gas pedal replaced? or maybe it its just the floor mats LOL

All jokeing aside, it more than likely wouldn't be the first because it's drive shaft would be laying on the ground:

MARCH 2010 - Toyota is recalling certain model year 2010 Tundra vehicles with four wheel drive, there is a possibility that an improper weld exists at the union of the propeller shaft and yoke. Due to this improper weld, this joint may separate and the separated shaft may come into contact with the road surface. This may result in a loss of vehicle control increasing the risk of a crash. Dealers will replace the front propeller shaft free or charge. The safety recall is expected to begin during April 2010. . 10V-091

Interesting, 2010 recall, sound very similar to another 2007 recall:

Description
POWER TRAIN:DRIVELINE:DRIVESHAFT
 Summary
ON CERTAIN 4-WHEEL DRIVE PICKUP TRUCKS, DUE TO THE IMPROPER HEAT TREATMENT OF THE SLIP YOKES THAT HAD BEEN REWORKED DURING THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS, THE HARDNESS OF THE SLIP YOKE MAY BE INSUFFICIENT.
 Consequence
IN THIS CONDITION, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE YOKE MAY BREAK CAUSING THE PROPELLER SHAFT TO SEPARATE AT THE JOINT AND COME INTO CONTACT WITH THE ROAD SURFACE OR THE FUEL TANK WHICH COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL OR A FUEL LEAK.


Or maybe the tundra wouldn't move at all because of the engine issues?

NEWS:   Toyota fixing engine failures in new Tundra truck
DETROIT, May 29 (Reuters) - A glitch in Toyota Motor Corp.'s Tundra pickup truck has caused 20 engine failures and forced it to track down other trucks at risk for the problem, the Japanese automaker said on Tuesday.
Toyota said a flaw in the camshaft in a limited number of 5.7-liter, V-8 engines installed in early versions of the Tundra has caused the engine component to crack and fail.
Toyota has billed the Tundra as its most important product launch ever. Its engine problems comes as Toyota faces pressure to maintain its reputation for quality in the face of a stretch of fast growth that has made it the world's largest automaker.

[Frontier1]

Highlander refresh, man Toyota is struggling with grill design
http://www.netcarshow.com/toyota/2011-highlander_hybrid/

[rrocket]

Highlander refresh, man Toyota is struggling with grill design
http://www.netcarshow.com/toyota/2011-highlander_hybrid/

Only the Hibrid gets that grill.  All others this one..which looks fine IMO

[Ex-airbalancer]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10679266

Toyota plans to roll out two new cars under the Prius name by next year, according to a dealer briefed on the plans, as the automaker seeks to turn its popular hybrid into a family of vehicles.

The Japanese automaker will begin selling a Prius station wagon starting next summer as either a 2011 or 2012 model, said Adam Lee, president of the Lee Auto Malls chain of dealerships in Maine. It will sell a plug-in version of the Prius that can get 30 miles (48 kilometers) on a charge starting later in the year, he said.

[rrocket]

Amusing story on Toyota UA....


Toyota’s Sudden Acceleration: Stop Walking Along The Road Immediately!
By Bertel Schmitt on October 13, 2010

Remember Toyota’s alleged sudden acceleration? And the hysteria surrounding it? Dubious databases were searched for dead bodies. The Secretary of Transportation himself recommended to stop driving your Toyota, and to drive it to the dealer instead – very carefully. Luckless swing club entrepreneurs took to driving a Prius instead, brakes smoking. Lawyers around the nation had wet dreams involving a Gulfstream V (or a 80 foot Sunseeker as a fall-back position.) As nothing of substance was found, the NHTSA asked the august body of the National Academy of Sciences to find the ghost in the machine.

Don’t even bother to look, it’s a worthless search. That’s what Paul Fischbeck, a professor of social and decision sciences and engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University, told the National Academy of Sciences.

The risk of dying in a traffic crash is 1.05 deaths per 100 million miles traveled, says Fischbeck. Analyzing the 2.3 million Toyota vehicles recalled for sticky pedals, Fischbeck said if all of them remained unfixed and on the road, the risk of dying would rise to 1.07 deaths per 100 million miles traveled. People have problems with large numbers, so Fischbeck puts it in perspective:

“If you canoe for half-a-mile you incur a 2-in-a-million risk of dying,” Fischbeck says. “Walking for 10 miles is about the same.”

Canoes must be immediately impounded. They are a menace to society.

According to Fischbeck, who is cited in a Detroit News article, the risk of dying while walking along the road is 19 times higher than that of driving in a recalled, but unfixed Toyota.

Walking along the road must immediately stop.

Fischbeck says it’s important to put the risk of sudden acceleration in context.

For instance, if you drive around in an unfixed Toyota for a whole year, you have the same risk of being killed in the line of duty as a police officer working for 2.5 days.

Get those cops off the streets, now (after they are done rounding up the people who walk along the road.)

The National Academy of Sciences will render its report sometime next year. It will remain interesting. Maybe.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/toyota%E2%80%99s-sudden-acceleration-stop-walking-along-the-road-immediately/#more-368488

[ArticSteve]

 

[TopGun]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10679266

Toyota plans to roll out two new cars under the Prius name by next year, according to a dealer briefed on the plans, as the automaker seeks to turn its popular hybrid into a family of vehicles.

.....

Not sure why it took them so long.  Get rid of the Scion rubbish and replace it with the Prius brand in the Toyota store.

Hmm...cars are fine, but I'm not sure I would want a Prius brand X-over or SUV though...I'd not want to take the chance that the Prius brand be tarnished with the attitude towards SUVs.

[rrocket]

Hmm...cars are fine, but I'm not sure I would want a Prius brand X-over or SUV though...I'd not want to take the chance that the Prius brand be tarnished with the attitude towards SUVs.

Exactly right, TG.  There has been some infighting about the whole spin off Prius thing....

[Ex-airbalancer]

new prius wagon
the car in the back ground is longer, higher, and has a square off rear end

[Ex-airbalancer]

found this for the size
Prius hatchback 175.6" L x 68.7" W x 58.3" H
Prius V ............180.7" L x 69.7" W x 62.4" H
Mazda 5 ..........181.5" L x 69.1" W x 64.2" H

[Shnak]

What I'd like to see is a Prius Minivan... Something like the Sienna, or even a tad smaller would be fine. If something like this would average around 8-9L/100km and sell for around $30-32k, I think it'd be a huge hit. That would probably be the vehicle that would finally convince me to jump into a hybrid vehicle.

[drederick]

Toyota Safety Audit Finds `Misunderstanding' With Suppliers

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-13/toyota-safety-audit-finds-misunderstanding-with-suppliers.html

Toyota Motor Corp. set out to audit suppliers in North America following its biggest recall crisis and discovered testing of components wasn’t as rigorous as it expected.

Toyota is a third of the way through audits of suppliers of “the highest priority” parts, and some suppliers believed to be testing products four times a year were only doing so once a year, Dino Triantafyllos, vice president of North American product quality, said yesterday.


What an absolute joke!

[rrocket]

Toyota Safety Audit Finds `Misunderstanding' With Suppliers

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-13/toyota-safety-audit-finds-misunderstanding-with-suppliers.html

Toyota Motor Corp. set out to audit suppliers in North America following its biggest recall crisis and discovered testing of components wasn’t as rigorous as it expected.

Toyota is a third of the way through audits of suppliers of “the highest priority” parts, and some suppliers believed to be testing products four times a year were only doing so once a year, Dino Triantafyllos, vice president of North American product quality, said yesterday.


What an absolute joke!

I believe it.  I worked for a company that was ISO 9000 certified, and they were supposed to have regular audits several times a year.  Never happened.

[Frontier1]

Toyota looking to pass the buck once again...see see see...no audits that's why...pathetic.

[rrocket]

Toyota looking to pass the buck once again...see see see...no audits that's why...pathetic.

The tone of the article wasn't about passing the buck or assigning blame.  It was about what they're doing to prevent issues.  And the only one they blamed was themselves.

"“These improvements we’re making, if we’d made them two years ago, maybe some of these issues wouldn’t have happened.”

[TopGun]

The tone of the article wasn't about passing the buck or assigning blame.  It was about what they're doing to prevent issues.  And the only one they blamed was themselves.

"“These improvements we’re making, if we’d made them two years ago, maybe some of these issues wouldn’t have happened.”

I'll use this as an example rrocket of the double standard that I've had poo-poo'd...which will certainly repeat itself.

We should applaud Toyota for what they accept is mis-management that resulted in their recalls.  Yet, we shoot GM for addressing their years of mis-management that resulted in their bankruptcy.  Double standard.

Differences?  Sure.  One can certainly argue GMs is failure on a larger scale...that GM impacted more people due to their larger # of units sold.  One could also argue that many of the issues were based on much, much longer-term structural issues that had to do more with the places they operated vs GM itself - i.e. US (unions) vs. Japan (non-union).

I don't think you can argue, however, that the basis of both failures is the same - mis-management.

[rrocket]

I don't think you can argue, however, that the basis of both failures is the same - mis-management.

Agree with that.  But it's not a double standard.  Having a part failure (or one found in a witch hunt) is a far cry from going belly up because of years, and years and years of making POS cars.  Mis-management for GM was just the icing on the cake, IMO.  They had the attitude of "we've been doing this for 100 years, we know what we're doing.".

In this case, Toyota has actually listened (unlike GM who didn't listen until it was too late), and the CEO himself has personally taken the blame.  HUGE difference.

Don't you worry...when Toyota has to go BK and we the people have to bail them out...I'll be first in line to throw darts at them...

[inco]

I don't think you can argue, however, that the basis of both failures is the same - mis-management.

Agree with that.  But it's not a double standard.  Having a part failure (or one found in a witch hunt) is a far cry from going belly up because of years, and years and years of making POS cars.  Mis-management for GM was just the icing on the cake, IMO.  They had the attitude of "we've been doing this for 100 years, we know what we're doing.".

In this case, Toyota has actually listened (unlike GM who didn't listen until it was too late), and the CEO himself has personally taken the blame.  HUGE difference.

Don't you worry...when Toyota has to go BK and we the people have to bail them out...I'll be first in line to throw darts at them...

You mean if - not when - right?

[drederick]

I don't think you can argue, however, that the basis of both failures is the same - mis-management.

Agree with that.  But it's not a double standard.  Having a part failure (or one found in a witch hunt) is a far cry from going belly up because of years, and years and years of making POS cars.  Mis-management for GM was just the icing on the cake, IMO.  They had the attitude of "we've been doing this for 100 years, we know what we're doing.".

In this case, Toyota has actually listened (unlike GM who didn't listen until it was too late), and the CEO himself has personally taken the blame.  HUGE difference.

Don't you worry...when Toyota has to go BK and we the people have to bail them out...I'll be first in line to throw darts at them...

Typical Artic! Toyota has admitted they let quality slip for a looooong time and this is yet another example of how bad the company (from management on down) really is.

Toyota actually listened? to who and when? about what exactly? Toyota acted like the most arrogant company in the world during the whole UA fiasco.

If my memory serves me well (and it may not) I believe it was you who championed that Toyota had a much better relationship with its suppliers than GM did. Well duh!

Seems like a typical Toyota supplier relationship goes like this:
make lots of them, for cheap, and deliver it on time. NO QUESTIONS asked about how you do it - just do it! (and when something goes wrong we'll just throw you under the bus as it isn't Toyota's fault )

How much easier could Toyota be on its suppliers if they don't give a crap what occurs at their facilities?

Oh and GM did go bankrupt - maybe that might be the best thing for Toyota to do as well to straighten out their own affairs.

[Frontier1]

And here we go again!!! 1.5 million vehicles to be recalled http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2010/10/toyota-recall-lexus-avalon-highlander/1