23rd Oct 2006, 19:32

I have never seen anyone bash GM or Ford so much. There is not one perfect car or truck I have ever owned many of which were imports and many domestic. However of those I still wish I had my 63 Split Vette, my 69SS Camaro, My 64 Impala SS convertible which are only crappy GM's in your opinion. I always had a pickup mostly GM, but I have had Rangers, one Toyota and even a VW pickup in my household at any given time. If you keep any of them long enough they need clutches, brakes, front end work etc the more miles you add and longer you keep them... all of them... including Toyota. As I get older I prefer to avoid mechanical headaches buy new, get a new vehicle warranty instead of freezing outside with my head under the hood in the winter or chasing down parts.

26th Oct 2006, 01:25

Did any of you see where Toyota is recalling 30,000 Scions due to an airbag problem? Boy, that is just what you want in your vehicle, a problem with the airbag.

26th Oct 2006, 11:38

Between the problem with the Highlander's sticking accelerator and the Scion's defective airbags, it sounds like Toyota is doing a great job at trying to help control the population explosion by eliminating many of it's customers!!

27th Oct 2006, 17:51

When we were looking at small trucks we looked at the Tacoma, but the salesman there had the same rude, arrogant manner as the salesman who has been posting comments on this site. It turned us off so much we decided that we'd buy something else. Rudeness and arrogance DON'T sell cars!!

11th Jan 2007, 16:02

I wanted to add a comment about some of the guys on here claiming they buy a vehicle every 100k or less. Your only reason is that you don't want to be driving a rusty, rattly old truck around?

First of all, who's to say that in 150,000, 200,000, or 300,000 miles, those cars will be rusty, faded, mechanically unsound, or rattly? That's 1970's logic. My 96 Tacoma has over 200k on it now and still looks and drives like new. So does my wife's 1990 Civic. So does my Brother's Avalon- all with more than 200k on the odometer.

Now let's do some basic economics... Let's say that you will automatically buy another car every 3 years, or about the time it takes to put 100k on the car. That's 20k every 3 years that you're spending just so that you can rid your fears of having a rusty, rattly old car. First of all, if your car is rusty, faded, and rattly at 100k, or even 200k, then you're abusing the car or giving it bad maintenance. Secondly, you're blowing 100k in 15 years for cars. Totally unnecessary. If I did that, I would be up to car No.4 now versus the one I've had for almost 12 years now.

You could have rebuilt and totally refurbished a car several times over on what you're spending on a shiny new American POS every 3 years. This stuff irratates me because this country is in serious debt and mainly because people are irrational with their money. It also means that if you subscribe to the " oh- it's old, so it must be worn out" camp, then you're acting like sheeple- just what all those companies WANT you to do. A car is just a machine. It doesn't care that it is 5 years old or 50 years old. If you take care of it, it will last for a very long time. It isn't just going to up and fall apart at some magical date or mileage milestone. Think. Thanks.

11th Jan 2007, 16:41

Or maybe people trade a car in every 3 to 4 years because the are sick of the same car/truck, have the means, and want something new? Not everyone who drives a new car is in debt to there eyeballs. You like to keep cars a long time, good for you.

11th Jan 2007, 16:54

Your point may have been valid five or 10 years ago, but today cars are incredibly complex machines with endless computers and electronic stuff. And guess what? That stuff breaks down, and it IS expensive.

Anyone who keeps a modern car past its warranty is looking at big expenses one way or another.

Best thing to do is lease, and there is leasing for people who drive 35k a year.

11th Jan 2007, 17:38

I'm beginning to think that this is just 2 guys (A Ford & a Toyota owner) just arguing back and forth.

11th Jan 2007, 22:17

I have yet to convince my wife to drive a car 17 years old with 200,000 plus miles. I guess we could wear the same clothes, never take a vacation, never eat out etc. to economize as well. Not everyone wants to rely on old vehicles which are vital to make it to work eveyday. I would rather have my wife and young children commute in a newer vehicle without potentially leaving them stranded or worse. If you sell or trade a vehicle it is not throwing it away. You can keep a vehicle til it falls apart, but I find it depressing to remain driving a faded or rusted project vehicle.

12th Jan 2007, 07:23

I should have sold my last import as soon as mine hit 36,000 miles. There is still deductibles with extended warranties if you don't mind paying. I had a transmission, water pump, complete set of tires, all new brakes in the next 10,000 miles. If you keep a car a long time price a new quality paint job. After 2000 if you own an import... I would sell as soon as the factory warranty expires. All your repairs done in quality shops/dealerships show up on Car Faxes and then your vehicle de-values. Actually the day before. I do not like outside extended warranties with deductibles. I went with GM factory 100,000 miles...

12th Jan 2007, 15:48

No, the point is actually just as valid, if not more valid today than 10, 15, 20 years ago. The fact is that technology isn't some magical mysterious thing that is only out there to befuddle you and make your car fall apart quicker. If that logic was accurate, then radios would still run on glass vacuum tunes that burn out and we'd still be using steam engines to get us across the country.

First of all, all those mysterious things, like computers, direct injection fuel systems, emission devices, and warning indicators all do one thing: make your car run better and last longer. I know because on one extreme, I have a 53 year old Ford truck. The thing might be more simplistic, but since it has a carburetor, points, exposed lube points, and parts that aren't as precise, it requires my constant attention to keep it running well. The life expectancy between rebuild is also a lot less since the metallurgical engineering of the parts means they simply wear out faster. I might get 100,000 miles out of the engine before the next rebuild.

On the other hand, a modern car's computer helps maintain the proper temperature, fuel to air mixture ratio, engine idle speed, and so on. The result is an engine that runs more efficiently and reliably. metallurgical engineering assures that the alloys and welding techniques used in a modern car are less prone to rust and wear. Tighter clearances means parts operate with less friction. On board readouts lets the owner know when to change the oil, inflate the tires, and other things that helps the owner take better care of their vehicle. Even the technology in paint, using modern nano-technology for smaller gaps between molecules in the paint means a longer lasting shine. To this day, my 11 year old truck still has absolutely no fading or scratching.

Of all the major concerns you mentioned over technology, none of the cars me or my family has had dating back to the mid 80's has had a problem related to anything invented for the car in the last 25 years: the computer, emission control equipment, or even long established convenience features like AC, power windows, or heated rear windows. In fact, none of our cars- all Toyotas and one Ford have had any problems that added up to more than an afternoon at the shop for something really minor and inexpensive. None left us stranded either. The only person I know who has been stranded was a friend who had a beat up Taurus he abused the death: He failed to keep the radiator filled and it overheated.

So in other words, your wife and kids are perfectly safe riding around in a 4 year old car. They would be just as safe in a 10 year old car that had been properly maintained.

Admittedly I make a decent income and could easily buy a new car probably every year. But I find it silly to do so. No- I don't feel deprived that Johnny Hotpants has a new bimmer while I drive down the freeway. Dear ole' Johnny probably has a lot less in the bank than I do. He probably also has a mortgage. I don't. I bought my house lock stock and barrel with cash- money that could've been spent on 4 new cars. What would you prefer?

So yes- I choose to drive my cars as long as they are mechanically sound simply because billions of dollars have been spent perfecting technology so that our cars will last longer and run more reliably. I find it ironic that people keep their cars less than they did 20 years ago and for no good reason other that they're concerned that this technology is out to get them and that heaven forbid if (gasp) the car leaves their family stranded on the freeway. That's why we have cellphones and tow trucks.