22nd Oct 2008, 08:45
I own a 2005 Kia Spectra 5 with 120,000 miles on it and I will say it is a solid and very reliable car. I average 700 miles a week in it and I bought it new. I've owned plenty of domestics and in my opinion the domestic brands are still behind in quality and reliability for some models. You have to remember that many domestic models use the import platforms to build they're cars from. The Ford Ranger for example is a Mazda based truck. The Ford 500/Taurus is based on a Volvo platform and the Chevy Aveo is made of Daewoo parts. If you gave me the choice of an Aveo or an Accent, I would choose the Accent hands down.
22nd Oct 2008, 12:23
Interesting. You've "owned them all", but for FIFTEEN YEARS you've been driving a Toyota. And after 7000 miles you can declare your Hyundai "more reliable". Even new Toyotas often go 7000 miles without problems, and GM guarantees their vehicles for 100,000 miles. Anyone who has not driven a domestic in 15 years is not in a position to make objective judgments of their reliability or build quality. Go drive a Fusion or Malibu before making such a comment.
As for comment 11:57, I'd beg to differ. Hyundai is now a world class car maker, on a par with Ford, GM and Chrysler. The new Hyundai Genesis is taking on Lexus, BMW and Mercedes (at half the price). Even the bare-bones Accent is a very good car for the money, and has a much better warranty than Honda or Toyota offer.
24th Oct 2008, 21:40
12:23 Yes, I have owned all of those I mentioned. And some of the domestics were newer than some of the Toyota's. More than one of each from the Big 3, 2 Gm's, a Ford, and a Dodge. All scrap more or less. 2 of the 3 Toyota's were as old or older than most of the domestics, yet somehow managed to never cost me a nickel while the domestics broke down about once a month, with the exception of the Dodge, which ran to 115,000 until the transmission lines began to leak.
The Fords and Chevy's were complete garbage. Nice to see they're improving FINALLY, but they haven't and most likely never will reach the standard of quality that Toyota set decades ago.
And yes, it was apparent as early as the test drive that this new Accent is much better than the domestics, new or old. For somebody who knows what they're looking at, the build quality is evident immediately; this Hyundai has it, the domestics still don't. Not enough at least for me to consider buying one. They still have a long way to go, and it begins with the engineering, not restyling them or adding useless gadgets instead of improving engine design. That's something the domestics simply can't compete with when compared to any Toyota or Honda. Those imports simply have much better design, which is why they last longer and run more efficiently.
25th Oct 2008, 13:07
These comments would carry more weight if there were some documentation given. For instance, it is obvious the domestics owned were bought USED, if all the commenter can purchase new is a base Accent. If a domestic is purchased with 200,000 miles already on it, then, yes, it is likely to start having minor problems.
Also, the vague statements such as "they are engineered better" are meaningless without valid EXAMPLES. HOW are they "engineered better"?? If I looked at a new Accent (or Toyota) just WHAT shows "better quality"?? And given the huge number of very major problems with new Toyota products (VERY well documented on this site and numerous others) just HOW are they "still better than domestics"?? Statements without some sort of proof (and OPINION is NOT PROOF) are totally meaningless.
26th Oct 2008, 21:29
It's obvious. Look under the hood. Look underneath. Look ANYwhere.
It's a tired, pointless argument to keep asking for documentation when it's been given about a thousand times here. Starting with the imports I mentioned ALWAYS ending up on the top of every quality/reliability list of every major car magazine I've ever read. All the major ones.
It's pretty funny that you think a domestic with 200,000 MIGHT have minor problems. All of mine, well maintained, were in the junkyard LONG before that, and if they have that many miles on them, it's usually after a second or third engine and transmission.
Not so with my imports. 200,000 is nothing for a Honda. Nothing for a Toyota. For a domestic owner, it's a long shot, and if it happens, it takes a LOT of money to get it there. I know, I've owned them.
27th Oct 2008, 13:06
No, it's NOT obvious. Look for WHAT?? Solid gold hoses and silver plated bolts?? Diamond studded spark plug boots?? How is looking under the hood (or anywhere else on the car) going to show any better quality?? How can you LOOK at something and tell how reliable it is?? The build quality and fit and finish on domestics is the same or better than any import, so what's to see?? All modern cars are virtually identical in terms of how things look under the hood. Again, no fact, just opinion. That's because there are no facts to support the "imports are better" argument.
29th Oct 2008, 20:07
13:06 To judge the quality of anything, you examine it. Look at it. It is obvious, if you have any discretion between cheap cars like a GM and good ones like a Toyota or Honda, that those imports are better built.
30th Oct 2008, 11:31
20:07 is not an answer. WHAT are we supposed to "examine"?? HOW is it "OBVIOUS"?? Please state examples (such as: "The fit between body panels is more precise", etc.)
31st Oct 2008, 22:42
11:31 Let's use a Toyota and a GM as examples:
1. Lift the hood on the Toyota. It IS obvious (again, to anyone mechanically inclined, who has actually worked on them) that everything under the hood is well designed and, even easier to see, the components are all arranged more neatly as are the cables, wires, hoses, etc. The GM, new or old, does NOT look like this. Looks cheap, amateur-ish.
2. Crawl underneath the car. Look at how the brake lines, fuel lines, exhaust pipes... are routed/mounted/supported. It IS obvious that the people at Toyota put far more time, effort, and money into doing it properly. Look at the GM... they clearly cut corners, as always.
3. The easiest way to see the difference in quality is to own each for a long period of time. Toyota engines, without question, are FAR better designed, (more efficient on fuel as the same size GM engine, even sounds much 'tighter' at higher rpms, and will run more smoothly). Because of cheaper design, GM engines wear out sooner under the same maintenance and treatment as a Toyota engine.
Sorry, posting your GM mileages and saying you 'never worked on it' means nothing because you can't prove it. No doubt all the domestic owners will chime in about some mythical Toyota that needed an engine at 20,000 miles and some magical GM that went 300,000 miles with no repairs. I'm sure that somewhere in the world, each of those things has actually happened. The FACT is that those are extremely rare exceptions, and practically ALL of the time, the Toyota will run MUCH longer.
Sorry if you don't agree, that's just the reality of it.