Perhaps we are just tuning out your repeated same message. Not everybody would recommend a Ford or a GM, there are plenty of folks with their own preferences. We all do not have to agree with yours or mine.
Yes, by all means let's DO let the numbers do the talking:
1) Toyota number one in recalls (30 million and counting).
2) Toyota number one in fines levied against it for lack of concern for customer safety.
3) Toyota number one in amount of money paid to victims of its negligence (1.1 BILLION dollars).
4) Toyota Corolla dead last in Motor Trend's compact car comparison.
Exactly. You like Toyota, and since no one knows you on here, it's best to appreciate that people buy with applications, and not all the same model.
No thanks, I don't really care for vehicles that look like a dust buster on wheels.
Let's get one thing straight - I do not "like" Toyota, nor have I ever owned a Toyota, I just find the smear campaign and the building up of mediocre Ford products unjustified.
I rent cars throughout the year. I agree it is a great way to test drive a car. It is not cheap, but a weekend rental is cheap, and if you pick out two or three cars and do it over a few weeks, it can be a great way to check MPG in actual driving and discover things you might otherwise miss.
My only suggestion is to try to get the lowest mileage cars, as abuse by other renters and deferred maintenance... i.e. out of balance ties, warped rotors, etc can give a negative impression of an otherwise fine car. On the flip side, though, higher mileage rentals may give an indication of interior wear and tear, and mechanical durability.
First hand mechanical issues, and why someone switched to GM like we did, is why we are here.
Apparently you didn't read past the first car (Prius). Styling is subjective, and in recent years a major car magazine referred to the Ford Fusion's front end styling as looking like a Lady Gillette (or Shick). The point was you may feel one car looks like a Dustbuster, others may think another looks like a hand-held razor. Whatever. At least most of us would agree that the Pontiac Aztek ranks as one ugly vehicle. :)
I beg to differ about rental cars. As a former new car salesman, I can assure you that rental vehicles receive far less abuse and neglect than demos, lease returns or privately owned cars driven by teenaged drivers. Rental cars are generally driven by mature business people or families on vacation. Rarely are they abused. They are also serviced very regularly. I knew lease customers who never had the oil changed during an entire 36 month lease, and demos are abused beyond imagining.
I strongly recommend used rental cars as a great used car buy. My family has owned three former rental cars and contrary to myth all rental cars are not "strippers". All of ours were fully loaded upscale models. The last rental car I rented was a totally loaded Impala LTZ with leather and moon roof. It had over 30,000 miles on it, and looked and drove like a brand new car.
My best used car finds were found by my mother in assisted living. She calls me and I pay a fair price. These are seniors that were no longer able to drive anymore. One owner, and garaged most of their life with all service records. Typically luxury cars. You are pretty assured that they were not driven hard.
My best find was a showroom condition Bonneville and a Park Avenue. For a second car, this is a great source. My mother simply calls me. They may need a new battery or minor things, but in general are very nice vehicles. You may not get a sports car etc.
The other upside is that I drove for a while and didn't lose on what I paid for them. No car payments and safe as well. Pick up one with 30 or 40000 miles on it and it's literally new.
Perhaps it is time that we post here using our real name (or a screen-name that would ensure that one person is signing in to his or her account, so that we then can make up our minds as to whether it is the same person or group of people using what I consider inflammatory terms such as "Loyal Americans" and/or insinuating that those who buy imports somehow don't care about their country (if they happen to be American)).
I admit, these posts bother me and I do often react with displeasure, particularly to one person's opinions, which I completely disagree with. The funny thing is because I disagree with the import bashing and misinformation constantly posted on this site, there are those who assume that I own a Toyota - not that it matters, but I don't, and again not that it matters, but I own 2 domestic vehicles.
Anyway, from this point on I will do my best not to react with anything but a courteous response, and I will do even better to try to not respond at all. :)
It just really bothers me to see fact twisted and half-truths posted for no other reason but to discredit a manufacturer that is based in Japan, yet employs thousands of Americans.
I don't know if using names or screen names to stop the abuse this is something that Steven would or could actually do - I have no idea what the liability issues would be. But I'd like to see this page go back to what is was before all of this nonsense started four or five years ago.
Until anything changes, I'll just identify myself as a Car Survey fan from Massachusetts who believes everybody has the right to buy & drive what they want to drive, without being wrongly accused of not being a "Loyal American" - which I have been accused of on this site, by defending the right of Americans to purchase imports.
Just a thought to curb the rhetoric - a Massachusetts Reader.
Steven here (moderator of the site).
I have considered usernames many times, but haven't implemented them for the following reasons:
1. Having usernames implies account creation and passwords, and that raises a barrier to new visitors that's currently not there.
2. The site isn't supposed to be a forum. Casual visitors adding new experiences to the site are what adds the most value in my view. Some regular visitors have written many great, helpful comments, and it's wonderful that people enjoy reading the site regularly, but I'm wary about moving the site even more in the direction of becoming a forum.
3. People are free to add a name/nickname in the text of their comment. I've asked regular visitors to do this in the past, but most people seem to want to stay anonymous, while requiring others to identify themselves.
4. Some comments can be very personal and unpleasant already, and some people try to track others across the site via their writing style (with varying degrees of success - never 100% though). I'm concerned that were commenters more identifiable, that personal animosity and conflicts would actually increase, rather than decrease.
5. The site has not required logins for comments for its entire history. Adding usernames now would look a bit strange, when set against the existing comments.
6. The key problem is that some visitors find it difficult to resist adding fuel to the fire of polarised discussions, where the outcome is inevitable mutual antagonism. Adding usernames does little to fix this fundamental issue.
7. Slightly related, but recently I added the ability for reviewers to disable comments on their reviews, so that anyone who dislikes the nature of the comments, can keep them off their reviews. This was prompted by several reviewers asking for reviews to be removed, after becoming unhappy with the nature of the comments being made.
With all that said, I don't rule out usernames at some point, or perhaps logins via social networks like Facebook or Twitter, but I'm not convinced that the benefits of usernames outweigh the disadvantages.
Steven Jackson, firstname.lastname@example.org
CSDO Media Limited