Blue Oval Guide Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/20/news/compa...rtune/index.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertlane Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 "Does it save enough money to pay for itself?" asks Jim Press, president of Toyota Motor Sales in the U.S. "That's not the idea. What's the true cost of a gallon of gas, if you factor in foreign aid, Middle Eastern wars, and so on? The truth is on our side." The question is: How much will Toyota be able to boost the Hybrid's efficiency in the future? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retro-man Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 Carlos Ghosn, CEO of Japanese rival Nissan, likes to poke fun at Toyota's supposed social responsibility. "Some of our competitors say they are doing things for the benefit of humanity," he says. "Well, we are in a business, and the company has a mission of creating value." "Does it save enough money to pay for itself?" asks Jim Press, president of Toyota Motor Sales in the U.S. "That's not the idea. What's the true cost of a gallon of gas, if you factor in foreign aid, Middle Eastern wars, and so on? The truth is on our side." Two competing views of reality, and of "value". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc-o Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 I'm not supporting either point of view, but I think the majority of hybrid buyers so far believe the fiscal cost of hybrids is offset by the benefit to the planet - that even though the money may never be recouped, their environmental conscience is clear. Hey, whatever rocks your boat is what I say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 The ugly truth about how Toyota ran roughshod over patent laws is another story that is waiting to be told. I'm not a crowd person. With this many people on the Toyota band wagon, it's time to get off. You can't find hardly a single analyst with a single negative thing to say about this company, and that's kind of scary. It's not like Toyota doesn't have some pretty major weaknesses out there. For instance, their profits in a very large part are due to sustaining sales volume for the Camry in a segment that is slowly shrinking, and which is drawing more and more competitive entries. The Accord already outsells the Camry on the retail side. Moreover, they have recklessly built a plant with 250k units of production capacity for a truck that has never sold more than 130k units, and in a segment that is extremely competitive, and which has not seen a major change in marketshare in over a decade. ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricers-shaft-blueoval Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 For instance, their profits in a very large part are due to sustaining sales volume for the Camry in a segment that is slowly shrinking, and which is drawing more and more competitive entries The Accord already outsells the Camry on the retail side.. And how well is yesterdays champion the mighty Taurus doing? Moreover, they have recklessly built a plant with 250k units of production capacity for a truck that has never sold more than 130k units, and in a segment that is extremely competitive, and which has not seen a major change in marketshare in over a decade. Maybe they plan on meting out the same sort of punishment to the F 150 as the Tacoma handed out to the once mighty Ranger! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 For instance, their profits in a very large part are due to sustaining sales volume for the Camry in a segment that is slowly shrinking, and which is drawing more and more competitive entriesThe Accord already outsells the Camry on the retail side.. And how well is yesterdays champion the mighty Taurus doing? Moreover, they have recklessly built a plant with 250k units of production capacity for a truck that has never sold more than 130k units, and in a segment that is extremely competitive, and which has not seen a major change in marketshare in over a decade. Maybe they plan on meting out the same sort of punishment to the F 150 as the Tacoma handed out to the once mighty Ranger! Those who cannot remember the past.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sixcav Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 I've owned a lot of different kinds of cars, even Toyota's and of course Fords. I'll never buy another Toyota and not out of some patriotc reason, although I do love my country. No the reason I dislike them is because I found out that Toyota is actually overpriced for the option content that you get. I paid nearly 18,000 for a Tacoma truck that after about six months had the most uncomfortable seats I have ever endured and the truck was stripped down to nothing. They wanted to charge me to have a clock installed!!!! The clock!!!! It's an option!!!!! Who does that? Toyota options a lot of things on their vehicles that other manufacturers include as standard equipment. At least that was their standard procedure in the late ninties. That coupled with the fact that the service department here was absolutely a horrible joke sealed the deal for me. I got rid of the truck as fast as I could and will never buy another Toyota. Later I found that JD Powers ranks Toyota service departments among the worst in the country for customer service. I know why. Anyway, just my two cents on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 The ugly truth about how Toyota ran roughshod over patent laws is another story that is waiting to be told. I'm not a crowd person. With this many people on the Toyota band wagon, it's time to get off. You can't find hardly a single analyst with a single negative thing to say about this company, and that's kind of scary. It's not like Toyota doesn't have some pretty major weaknesses out there. For instance, their profits in a very large part are due to sustaining sales volume for the Camry in a segment that is slowly shrinking, and which is drawing more and more competitive entries. The Accord already outsells the Camry on the retail side. Moreover, they have recklessly built a plant with 250k units of production capacity for a truck that has never sold more than 130k units, and in a segment that is extremely competitive, and which has not seen a major change in marketshare in over a decade. ... I see the Tundra at 200k--with the new Texas plant what is the Indiana plant going to produce? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 I see the Tundra at 200k--with the new Texas plant what is the Indiana plant going to produce? Yeah just like The Titan was supposed to do 100K units a year....:rolleyes: The Titan is a far better effort then the new Tundra is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricers-shaft-blueoval Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Those who cannot remember the past.......... does that remind one of Ford? and GM? I see the Tundra at 200k--with the new Texas plant what is the Indiana plant going to produce? another 100k to start with! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 does that remind one of Ford? and GM? Americans have neither a monopoly on arrogance nor on short-sighted decision making. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bec5150 Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 I've owned a lot of different kinds of cars, even Toyota's and of course Fords. I'll never buy another Toyota and not out of some patriotc reason, although I do love my country. No the reason I dislike them is because I found out that Toyota is actually overpriced for the option content that you get. I paid nearly 18,000 for a Tacoma truck that after about six months had the most uncomfortable seats I have ever endured and the truck was stripped down to nothing. They wanted to charge me to have a clock installed!!!! The clock!!!! It's an option!!!!! Who does that? Toyota options a lot of things on their vehicles that other manufacturers include as standard equipment. At least that was their standard procedure in the late ninties. That coupled with the fact that the service department here was absolutely a horrible joke sealed the deal for me. I got rid of the truck as fast as I could and will never buy another Toyota. Later I found that JD Powers ranks Toyota service departments among the worst in the country for customer service. I know why. Anyway, just my two cents on it. I test drove two Toyotas prior to buying my Ranger in 2002, and the experience was indicitive of what is wrong with the Ranger. See, while the Ranger sheetmetal and interior are relatively old, the parts you cannot see are extremely modern, more so than the Tacoma was in 2002 anyway. The Tacoma had updated seats, dash, and exterior details but once you turned the key it was "back to 1985." The engine ran out of steam early, probably around 3000RPM. I can't say for sure because the "stripper" I was driving didn't even have a Tach. It also had no radio, no ABS, and a solid bench that didn't recline. I recently looked at the all new Tacoma and it's not much better. A one piece no reclining bench? No way!! Then I got into the Ranger. DOHC 2.3, ABS, tach, clock along with AM/FM radio and clock. The engine sounds EXACTLY like the old 2.3 until it hits 3500RPM where it lets you know it's got some beans under the hood. IN short, in 2002 the Ranger was a better truck in every way. And because Ford had to GIVE them away, I saved over 4000 dollars when compared to a Toyota. The Ranger is a nice MODERN truck. Too bad the modern, ABS, dual cam 16 valve all aluminum modern mechanical piece is covered by a body and interior from the mid 90's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 does that remind one of Ford? and GM? I see the Tundra at 200k--with the new Texas plant what is the Indiana plant going to produce? another 100k to start with! So, 100,000 out of Indiana and 250,000 from the new Texas plant -- are you asserting that Toyota is going to sell 350,000 Tundras in another year? :poke: :blink: :lol: :lol: :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricers-shaft-blueoval Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 So, 100,000 out of Indiana and 250,000 from the new Texas plant -- are you asserting that Toyota is going to sell 350,000 Tundras in another year? :poke: :blink: :lol: :lol: :lol: the tundra will do to the f 150 what the camry did to the taurus tacoma did to the ranger sienna did to the windstar corolla did to the focus lexus did to lincoln Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kris Kolman Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Yep Toyota master of the game... 15 yrs of failure and they're finally ready to compete, just like Nissan :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one2gamble Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 the tundra will do to the f 150 what the camry did to the taurus tacoma did to the ranger sienna did to the windstar corolla did to the focus lexus did to lincoln its pretty funny that you think those cars "did" something to create failure in the other The taurus died due to a bad design and lack of updates The tacoma MOVED UP MARKET AWAY FROM THE RANGER The Sienna DOESNT RULE THE MINIVAN MARKET Lexus didnt do anything to Lincoln, Ford hurt lincoln Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricers-shaft-blueoval Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 its pretty funny that you think those cars "did" something to create failure in the other The taurus died due to a bad design and lack of updates The tacoma MOVED UP MARKET AWAY FROM THE RANGER The Sienna DOESNT RULE THE MINIVAN MARKET Lexus didnt do anything to Lincoln, Ford hurt lincoln its very sad all the same and my guess is that th f 150 will meet the same fate as its brethren. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sixcav Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 Let us cover what the whole import versus domestic issue is really all about. We can split hairs about looks and mechanical design and what have you. It's nothing. Let's concentrate on the steak and not the peas. Back in the 1980's and early 90's the japanesse cars being imported into the US were far more reliable than their American counterparts. This is when they established a strong foothold on the US market. So we had a whole generation of Americans who grew up in a time when it was common knowledge that Japanesse imported cars were better than American cars. There is no arguing that fact. You could get mid to late 80's Accord to last years longer with far fewer problems than say a Lumina or Grand Prix of the same era. So the notion became quite ingrained in the minds of many Americans. Saying a Toyota was more reliable than a Ford back then was like saying 2 + 2 = 4. Well people don't change much, they resist change most of the time. Since the early 90's the domestic car makers across the board stepped up their game and started making much more reliable cars, most of them easily on par with the Japanesse offerings. As proof of this I offer a small excerpt from a recent news article about the JD Powers long term reliability ratings Those looking to engage in some Asian vs. American bickering will, of course, find plenty of ammunition in this year's report. Simply stated, this year's data shows that domestic manufacturers deserve to make claims of having competitive quality, as they have 7 of the 14 nameplates with above-average dependability. European companies, however, have some work to do-- only aforementioned Porsche and BMW are ranked above average. Ford is of course one of the seven with above average quality. But then so is Toyota. There is no denying that Toyota makes a reliable product. But for some reason, many people seem to want to deny that Ford does also. I attribute this to the fact that as I pointed out an entire generation of Americans has grown up with the idea that any domestic car is inferior to any Japanesse import. This is simply not true, not any more, nor has it been for quite some time now. So despite all the postings in news articles and information out there that is available that is contrary to the notion that all Japanesse cars are far superior to all American cars some people simply will refuse to accept that reality. They are so ingrained with the notion that Toyota is the pinnacle of automotive design and Ford is the bottom rung on the ladder that they refuse to accept any other idea, even if it is the reality of the world we live in. For the record, Mazda, Subaru, Nissan, and Mitsubishi all ranked below average for long term reliability in this years study. So the world in which we live is different than what it once was. The real question here is, can the die hard domestic car bashers accept the reality that my Ford will easily last as long, with just as few problems as your Toyota, and probably have a better resale value down the line? Article quoted http://www.autoblog.com/2006/01/29/j-d-pow...dability-study/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 26, 2006 Share Posted February 26, 2006 my guess is that th f 150 will meet the same fate as its brethren. If the F150 were to suffer the same fate as the Taurus, it would fall to the Silverado. Not the Tundra. The F150 has out-innovated and out-sold better trucks than the Tundra for the last 30 years. The assumption that Toyota can succeed wherever it wishes is ludicrous. Toyota has no guarantees of success at any venture, and to assume otherwise is to set the stage for failure. For instance, construction of over 300k units of Tundra capacity in the U.S. Do they expect to displace that much volume in the fullsize truck arena that quickly? As though the existing product in the segment is rotting away due to neglect (Camry, Tacoma) or arrogance (Lexus)? Ford does not need Toyota to force them to take the fullsize truck sector seriously. They have taken it seriously for longer than you've been alive, and they have built a track record of success in this segment that Toyota will never achieve in any segment anywhere in this country. ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llog215 Posted February 26, 2006 Share Posted February 26, 2006 For instance, construction of over 300k units of Tundra capacity in the U.S.... I'm not 100% sure but I think Toyota can build the Tacoma in Indiana, as well as the Tundra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bec5150 Posted February 26, 2006 Share Posted February 26, 2006 (edited) I think it is a different time, and the Ford F-Series is much more reliable than the Fords of the late 70's to early 90's, the time where Toyota had the overwelmingly higher quality. BUT! Ford better remember the mistakes of the past two decades. If reading the posts from some of the 6.0L owners is any indication, this may NOT be happening. Those that fail to remember the mistakes of the past...... Edited February 26, 2006 by bec5150 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 26, 2006 Share Posted February 26, 2006 I think it is a different time, and the Ford F-Series is much more reliable than the Fords of the late 70's to early 90's, the time where Toyota had the overwelmingly higher quality. BUT! Ford better remember the mistakes of the past two decades. If reading the posts from some of the 6.0L owners is any indication, this may NOT be happening. Those that fail to remember the mistakes of the past...... 1) Toyota is actually fighting for a better reliability rep in the fullsize truck arena, not Ford. Toyota's trucks are widely perceived as not up to the tasks that truck owners typically demand of them. 2) Ford has handled the PSD issue far better than many past launch fiascos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
range Posted February 26, 2006 Share Posted February 26, 2006 (edited) Speaking of the PowerStroke.... Here is what people in Iraq have to say about them ..."Several of the soldiers and other security companies asked me how the trucks hold up," Powell wrote in one e-mail. "And each time I tell them I wouldn't want to be in anything else." LINK Contrast that performance with the woefully pitiful performance of a Ridgeline driving 10mph on a dirt road. (reference Edmunds.com review of 2006 Ridgeline) The fact is Ford products are placed in dramatically more severe service than anything else on the road. Whether it be Crown Victoria Police Interceptor's sustaining 100mph rear end collisions, or Power Strokes in Iraq meeting roadside bombs, the products from Ford perform their mission in a manner that products from Toyota or Honda could only dream about. When the heavy lifting needs to be done, its safe to say its not going to be in a Honda or Toyota Edited February 26, 2006 by range Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted February 26, 2006 Share Posted February 26, 2006 I wouldnt say that the PSD is a bad engine...hell it was still running with 1/4 tank of water and algae in my buddies F-250...long unfortunate story... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.