Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 148 posts

Re: Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

#101

Post by SlowRobotAhead »

jstarfish wrote: post #57
albeec13 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the exception of safety features (think blind spot monitoring, backup cameras, lane keep assist, parking sensors) and mobile connectivity features like bluetooth, frankly I'm getting tired of all the crap they're throwing into vehicles these days for many of the reasons you mention. It seems every manufacturer or parent brand has their own infotainment system, NAV, etc. and you pay the price for it when you buy…

Look for trims of vehicles designed for fleet use. Those remain pretty spartan.

They look it, but they aren’t. The RAM truck that has manual windows and manual door locks - has the same ABS/ESP, Radio Hub, body controller, battery modules, 7 CAN buses (2018+), three or more LIN buses, etc etc as the full load models.

Same body controller guts in as an Alfa Romeo.

Re: Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

#102

Post by SlowRobotAhead »

repler wrote: post #95
SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #9

Automotive EE here. In the last 5-8 years there has been a DRAMATIC change in the way vehicles are tested and released. Everyone has become much more focused on electronic features - while at the same time almost everyone is completely outsourcing electronics design and firmware. Cars hit the lots with 10 new flashes waiting. When I started, it was a BIG DEAL if you had a lot held up somewhere in Detroit because of a…

> I would not purchase a 2019 anything right now. I'd allow for two-three years worth of flashes before considering a new car Do you mean a model that is all new for 2019 or do you mean literally any car assembled in 2019?

The latter basically. I have seen no one that has their shit together right now.

Re: Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

#103

Post by ams6110 »

headmelted wrote: post #99
ams6110 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Older Toyotas rust horribly, especially the trucks, but are mechanically very solid. I've had rust issues with Nissans also. Honda seems to have it figured out. I've been quite happy with Ford also. Chrysler products are the worst I've ever owned from a reliability standpoint, most of my issues with them have been electrical not mechanical though.

Have to say that the Corolla I referred to above is spotless wrt rust. Undercarriage too. This is all the more impressive given that our roads are salted constantly in the winter months here. The worst I've seen for it are mid-2000s Fords. It's like the frames aren't galvanized at all, but that may be a problem limited to UK models. That said my (beloved) Nissan Leaf is starting to go orange underneath but thankfully…

I live in an area that goes crazy with salt at the slightest threat of snow or ice. So any shortcomings in corrosion protection are exposed here.

Re: Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

#104

Post by tgeorge »

kenhwang wrote: post #18

This article seems to be written using results from a J.D. Power report. J.D. Power's methodology is commonly known to be extremely flawed in that they weigh all "issues" equally. So an engine failure is the same severity as Bluetooth not connecting. Furthermore, tiebreakers are broken in pretty nonsense ways, and many suspect it's by whoever pays the most. For example, they crowned Buick the most dependable brand, b…

I thought Fiat stood for Fix It Again Tony?

Re: Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

#105

Post by SlowRobotAhead »

robocat wrote: post #55
SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Is anyone making reasonably well-appointed vehicles without throwing everything and the kitchen sink in there? No. Honda, Toyota, Fiat, GM, everyone seems to have the same problem. For what it's worth, FiatChrysler and GM have at least had the sense to set higher requirements for vendor/suppliers than Toyota. Specicially, after Toyota's "unintended acceleration" issues (mostly floor mats, some APPS/Pedal issues) it…

> over 12,000 GLOBAL VARIABLES How many global variables do each of Toyota's competitors have?

Does it matter if all your friends jump off a bridge?

Toyota got caught with inexcusably bad software practices. There is a reason Chrylser, GM, Ford, and others are pushing it out of house to suppliers.

Re: Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

#106

Post by SlowRobotAhead »

justin66 wrote: post #36
SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #9

Automotive EE here. In the last 5-8 years there has been a DRAMATIC change in the way vehicles are tested and released. Everyone has become much more focused on electronic features - while at the same time almost everyone is completely outsourcing electronics design and firmware. Cars hit the lots with 10 new flashes waiting. When I started, it was a BIG DEAL if you had a lot held up somewhere in Detroit because of a…

> The mfgs wanted to outsource the development, and now when they need an adjustment to traction control it's a $50, 100, 250, 500,000 charge, BUT, they've also moved the responsibility to the mfgs like Bosch, ConTevis, etc. I can see where this would complicate and slow delivery of bugfixes, but if you ask me who I'd rather have mucking around with my ABS firmware, a GM engineer or a Bosch engineer, that's an easy a…

Except Bosch is doing almost all of their real engineering in India right now. GM has their testing ground with cars and data on hand.

It's not as simple as you make it out to be. There are times I would want the system to be looked at holistically not just as components.

Re: Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

#107

Post by kenhwang »

tgeorge wrote: post #104
kenhwang wrote: post #18

This article seems to be written using results from a J.D. Power report. J.D. Power's methodology is commonly known to be extremely flawed in that they weigh all "issues" equally. So an engine failure is the same severity as Bluetooth not connecting. Furthermore, tiebreakers are broken in pretty nonsense ways, and many suspect it's by whoever pays the most. For example, they crowned Buick the most dependable brand, b…

I thought Fiat stood for Fix It Again Tony?

Broke my waterpump. Lots of trouble usually serious.

Re: Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

#108

Post by zokula »

jacquesm wrote: post #84
grewil2 wrote: post #77

I bought a plain, no turbo Volvo 940 for $1000 ten years ago. It's 25 years old now, and still is very reliable. Newer Volvos seem a lot more complex, and I can't help thinking that there's a lot more electronics and mechanisms that can break than in the old construction. Edit: ugh, I just realised I have become a grumpy old man.

Volvo is Chinese nowadays, the 940 you've bought is Swedish and no cost was spared in making it that reliable. That's also why Volvo is Chinese nowadays.

By that logic Toyota should of been Chinese 20 years ago?

Re: Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

#109

Post by zokula »

diddid wrote: post #79

I think one thing to remember that people who buy a Toyota drive it like it's... a Toyota. Cars that are driven hard will break down faster than cars that aren't, and I'm guessing the average BMW is pushed harder than the average Toyota. My wife can put a hole in a pair of nice running shoes faster than I can even wear tread off of a junky pair. Use matters, not all miles are equal.

You're lying to yourself if you think that's the case.

Re: Toyotas and Chevys Are Holding Up Better Than Most Luxury Brands

#110

Post by jacquesm »

zokula wrote: post #108
jacquesm wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Volvo is Chinese nowadays, the 940 you've bought is Swedish and no cost was spared in making it that reliable. That's also why Volvo is Chinese nowadays.

By that logic Toyota should of been Chinese 20 years ago?

Toyota has always been very frugal while delivering quality, Volvo was not, so no. And I think you meant 'have' instead of 'of'.

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Toyota_Way , pay extra attention to section #2.

Volvo took a much more 'premium' route towards quality, starting with galvanized steel bodies and other such costly measures, as well as producing on less efficient lines than Toyota. Even so, their reputation until the Chinese take-over was excellent, since then the division is as far as I know profitable so maybe this is a happy medium between baked in quality and cost to produce. But it will never go back to the 'tank' status that their older line-up has, which in a way is good because the modern ones fare much better in the crash tests than the oldies, even against mid-range cars in head-on or side-on collisions.

On another note, given the history between the two countries I don't see the Japanese government ok'ing a take-over of one of their prime brands by the Chinese.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Japan_relations

Post reply on HN