Do Lower Mainlanders really have no loyalty towards the US/Canadian auto industry?

[fT-z33wor]

[BNR32_Coupe]

Originally Posted by BoneThug

do people honestly buy toyotas for the name?

thats like bragging to your friends about getting a frigidare fridge.

"cool appliance man. glad you enjoy it"

if cars are like clothes toyotas are walmart branded.

yeah they do, unless you can think of another reason. they trust the name in reliability. whether other manufacturers are as reliable or not, toyota has a reputation associated with it. ask any joe schmoe walking down the street if they think toyota is reliable.

[thumper]

Originally Posted by taylor192

Devil's Advocate: Lexus doesn't exist overseas, everything is a Toyota. So loyalty is with a manufacturer, not a made up luxury brand.

um, lexus is a brand overseas (but obviously as part of the toyota corporation):

http://www.toyota.co.jp/worldwide/lexus/index.html

[MR_BIGGS]

Originally Posted by taylor192

What "fact" would that be?

Fact is the Vibe and Matrix are the same car. Please tell me the "facts" that make the Matrix more reliable.

He's right - essentially they are the same car!

case in point:
The Matrix is the Toyota version of a joint venture between Toyota and General Motors; the GM version being the Pontiac Vibe, which is assembled by New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. (NUMMI) in Fremont, California. A third version, also assembled at NUMMI, was sold in Japan from 2002 to early 2004 as the Toyota Voltz. Almost 2000 cars were produced before production ceased.[1] Although the Voltz was sold under the Toyota brand there, the vehicle had the same exterior as the Vibe.

Identical mechanically, and nearly as much internally, the Matrix and Vibe are clothed in different sheetmetal designed by their respective brands. Both vehicles are narrow, yet tall station wagons styled in a quasi-SUV fashion (called a crossover utility vehicle or "CUV" by Toyota)[2] and marketed to a fairly youthful market segment. This type of car is also commonly referred to as a sport wagon.

From Wiki

[MR_BIGGS]

Toyota Corolla may be the "wal-mart brand" but when my dad bought his 1990 corolla brand new - he had an idea it would last him...its got more than 300,000 clicks on it...its a scary thought...but other than some minor rust right above where the tires are on the sides of the car....it amazes me how well the car runs...it has more years it in than Chris Chelios......if he put new shocks on the car....it would be like a new car...of course..ppl will laugh..cause its such an old car and its not teh greatest looking car anymore...but from 1990 to now..it got my dad from point A to point B and his family...can't argue with that...

[Presto]

A lot of people lost faith in the domestics. It will take awhile to get some of them to look at domestics again. My family was loyal to Chrysler for quite a while (+20 years). We've had the odd GM and Ford, as well. Their final car was the Neon. It was such a shitty car. Crap/cramped interior, fuel consumption, and poor visibility convinced me to help them out. I bought them a Yaris, and sold the piece of shit for a loss. I'm sure the loss has been made up for with gas savings. I don't think they'll be looking at a Chrysler or any domestic for quite a while.

[Lomac]

Originally Posted by L-S-D

that maybe so but in the end both those cars are crap, u get what u pay. those cars are like 15 gs my rims cost almost that much, and in the end ppl would still rather have a toyota over a pontiac becus of the name and reliability rep of it, name 1 car by pontiac that has been around for over 10 years like a camry through the 90's and had a rep till now ???

Ooo, rims that cost almost as much as a new car. Whoopty-fucking-doo.

Toyota had a reputation for reliability, just as GM had a reputation for making quality, long-lasting vehicles. It wasn't until the 90's that GM's reputation began to sink due to cost cutting in materials and now Toyota is beginning to follow the same pattern. I know quite a few people who have new Toyota's ('05 and newer) and they've all had problems with 'em, whereas I know other people who have new GM's and they've had nothing go wrong.

Japanese vehicles used to be absolute crap. The Corolla, Camry, Accord, Civic, etc., all had horrible reputations for being absolute rust buckets. Then, yes, they all started to improve in the 90's. American companies began to feel the pinch and decided to cut costs in order to maintain competitive pricing. Unfortunately this is the same trap that Toyota is beginning to find itself in now.

As for a car from Pontiac... well, the G6 is simply a renamed Grand Prix, and that was always a decent vehicle. Just because a car doesn't keep the same name over a number of decades doesn't mean anything. Look at the Golf/Rabbit... the name has been switched four times in North America and the sales are still very strong.

And what about other joint ventures between the Americans and Japanese? Ford Fusion vs Mazda6? Ford Ranger vs Mazda B-Series? Chrysler vs Mercedes? Would you choose one over the other based on "reliability" despite the fact that everything that powers the car is the exact same?

[roastpuff]

Originally Posted by taylor192

What "fact" would that be?

Fact is the Vibe and Matrix are the same car. Please tell me the "facts" that make the Matrix more reliable.

It's assembled in a different plant, with different people? Made by Canadians yo!

I'd buy the Matrix because I think it looks a lot better, and is probably better made with better QC.

However, I wouldn't buy Toyotas - they're reliable but very bland. Like driving a fridge, like someone mentioned.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by L-S-D

that maybe so but in the end both those cars are crap, u get what u pay. those cars are like 15 gs my rims cost almost that much, and in the end ppl would still rather have a toyota over a pontiac becus of the name and reliability rep of it, name 1 car by pontiac that has been around for over 10 years like a camry through the 90's and had a rep till now ???

Prior to the 1989 Camry, Toyota basically made junk: square ugly econoboxes. I owned a 1990 Camry, awesome car, yet would not buy a 2009 Camry, its too big and has lost the fun factor that car had. If I was buying today I'd take a Malibu.

Ever driven a 1970 GTO "The Judge"? My brother had this one (same year, colour, ...)


Find me one Toyota that matches the history of The Judge.

Time change, stop being a sheep.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by roastpuff

I'd buy the Matrix because I think it looks a lot better, and is probably better made with better QC.

I agree, I prefer the Matrix too, yet the price difference would easily sway my decision if I were buying a DD.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by Lomac

And what about other joint ventures between the Americans and Japanese? Ford Fusion vs Mazda6? Ford Ranger vs Mazda B-Series? Chrysler vs Mercedes? Would you choose one over the other based on "reliability" despite the fact that everything that powers the car is the exact same?

How about:
Mazda 3 vs Volvo S40
Subaru WRX vs SAAB 9-2X

or my favourite:
Mercedes CLK320 vs C320 coupe, $25K difference in sticker price for the same chassis, engine, drivetrain, ... the $25K pays for some sheet metal, better interior and a couple of options.

[KinseySS]

Originally Posted by civicboi17

Im a huge GM guy and I can still laugh at this.

I actually laughed my ass off.

[roastpuff]

Originally Posted by taylor192

Prior to the 1989 Camry, Toyota basically made junk: square ugly econoboxes. I owned a 1990 Camry, awesome car, yet would not buy a 2009 Camry, its too big and has lost the fun factor that car had. If I was buying today I'd take a Malibu.

Ever driven a 1970 GTO "The Judge"? My brother had this one (same year, colour, ...)


Find me one Toyota that matches the history of The Judge.

Time change, stop being a sheep.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_2000GT



Too bad very few were made. Such a gorgeous car!

Originally Posted by taylor192

I agree, I prefer the Matrix too, yet the price difference would easily sway my decision if I were buying a DD.

Actually, price difference MSRP-wise is very little. Content-wise they're almost the same, though the Toyota offers auto-dimming rearview mirror and heated side mirrors which I really like.

Of course, when you talk about dealer incentives YMMV. At any rate if I had to look at the car every day, I'd get the Toyota and screw the price difference. The resale value difference will make up for it, too.

[hk20000]

Originally Posted by taylor192

Prior to the 1989 Camry, Toyota basically made junk: square ugly econoboxes. I owned a 1990 Camry, awesome car, yet would not buy a 2009 Camry, its too big and has lost the fun factor that car had. If I was buying today I'd take a Malibu.

Ever driven a 1970 GTO "The Judge"? My brother had this one (same year, colour, ...)


Find me one Toyota that matches the history of The Judge.

Time change, stop being a sheep.

Toyota Sprinter Trueno / Corolla Levin series. circa 1972 - 2001 then went to hell.
TE51 shown:

TE27 shown:

Toyota Corolla itself 1966 - present.
TE10 shown:

Mitsubishi Galant series. 1969-present.

The Z cars. 1976-present

Nissan GTR. 1966-present

Just cos you don't speak the language doesn't mean they don't have heritage. There are so many stories behind these fine automobiles. Best of all, they all have better HP/L than that hulk of a car you posted.

The number of 70s Z imported vs the number of them "still alive" today says a lot about their reliability and desirabilty (is that a word?).

[PHRiSCo]

In 2001 both my mom and i bought 2 brand new cars. I bought a 2002 Mazda Protege 5 and she bought a 2002 Chevrolet Cavalier. We both paid roughly the same price, about $16k. Only major difference that would effect the cost is that mine was a 5-speed and hers an automatic.

With my purchase I received 140hp, power windows, powers door, power sunroof, cruise control, decent suspension, nice interior, nice exterior, etc..., and don't forget a decent resale value after 3-4 years.

She got basically nothing, 115hp, she had to roll down her windows, had no sunroof, the car is ugly as shit and she didn't even get floor mats. Oh yeah, her resale value after 5 years? I think she got $1400 for it on trade in?

I will never buy a domestic. North American car manufacturers are garbage, I don't care what media reviews say.

[BoneThug]

Originally Posted by BNR32_Coupe

yeah they do, unless you can think of another reason. they trust the name in reliability. whether other manufacturers are as reliable or not, toyota has a reputation associated with it. ask any joe schmoe walking down the street if they think toyota is reliable.

yeah but so is honda, so are a lot of companies. me and you know a bit more indepth infor on both but the average consumer just knows that both cars dont need a lot of maintenance. regardless of that fact, i still dont think anyone, even if they do think toyotas are the tits of reliability, buys it with the intention of thinking people will think they are smart or cool. for them its just an appliance to get them from point A to point B. if they actually cared they'd buy a car with more personality.

disclaimer, nothing against the MR2 or supra or soarer or lexai. i just mean current gen toyota cars.

[Rich Sandor]

Most of you know I currently sell Fords, so I may seem biased. However, I own & drive 2 Porsches, and I've also worked at a Toyota store, and I'd love to work at a BMW store. Pretty much every major brand out there has a few cars that I really like.

I am NOT biased in any way. I don't diss other makes when people come into my store.

The reality is, that ALL new cars sold in North America these days are VERY reliable, and VERY safe.

Styling, and material quality is a subjective thing. Some people think imports are better in that regard. In the mid 90's, the imports had way better styling than any of the domestics. I think that's changing now. I think BNR32 & Taylor above both nailed it when they said it's an image thing. It is an image thing when people buy a Lincoln or Lexus, people don't want to be seen driving a "cheap" car; but, some people don't care about image.

If you want to talk about patriotism, buying a Toyota made in Canada is no different than buying a Ford made in Canada. The GDP goes to Japan or US, not Canada. BUT, it's better than buying a car made in any other country (as far as patriotism is concerned.)

However, how many people in Vancouver have a drop of patriotism for Canada in them? There are LOTS of immigrants (and locally borns) that just don't give a fuck about their current country. Honestly, what kind of car you drive is not as important as at least speaking the fucking language, paying your taxes, and having some freaking respect for your country!!!

I don't really care what cars people drive, I just don't like ignorant statements like "Imports are better" or "Ford is going out of business because they build shitty cars" Well then I guess Toyota builds shitty cars too since it's asking the Japanese government for money too.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by hk20000

Just cos you don't speak the language doesn't mean they don't have heritage. There are so many stories behind these fine automobiles. Best of all, they all have better HP/L than that hulk of a car you posted.

I wasn't being a hater, just trying to make a point.

I'll give you the Z-cars, even the early Skylines, yet the rest you posted are fugly. That GTO is gorgeous in comparison.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by PHRiSCo

In 2001 both my mom and i bought 2 brand new cars. I bought a 2002 Mazda Protege 5 and she bought a 2002 Chevrolet Cavalier. We both paid roughly the same price, about $16k. Only major difference that would effect the cost is that mine was a 5-speed and hers an automatic.

With my purchase I received 140hp, power windows, powers door, power sunroof, cruise control, decent suspension, nice interior, nice exterior, etc..., and don't forget a decent resale value after 3-4 years.

She got basically nothing, 115hp, she had to roll down her windows, had no sunroof, the car is ugly as shit and she didn't even get floor mats. Oh yeah, her resale value after 5 years? I think she got $1400 for it on trade in?

I will never buy a domestic. North American car manufacturers are garbage, I don't care what media reviews say.

Compare a Cobalt and the new Mazda 3 and you'll find its reversed since 2004. The Mazda is more expensive for less options, and those Proteges had some serious engine problems while the Cavalier may be a POS, yet it was a reliable POS.

The new Mazda 3 is fugly, the new Cobalt is decent looking.

[hk20000]

Beauty is in the eye of beholder.

Also we are talking about all imports right, how about Mercedes BMW and Audi etc when it comes to heritage and gorgeous cars? They also put the US cars to shame....

So heritage really isn't a strong point of US cars. It's only ever so true for the genXers who actually experienced how it was back in the 60s and lived to tell it. Newer generation knows better that V8 OHV was not ideal and it isn't something to be really proud of.

Whereas, look in 1976 the Skyline GTR made 150bhp out of 2L, the Corolla series made 115HP out of 1.6L back in the days of the 2T-G with fuel injection (EFI!) in 1970s...If you think of cars as more than "presence" and appreciate their contribution to the automotive world, there is a lot more to write about for German/Japanese auto than US/British automobiles (other than maybe the Mini?)

Just coz those Brits and Yanks speak the loudest in the international stage doesn't mean they made the best automobile....And people know that all too well now to still buy them. British automotive industry is entirely owned by other European countries (other than Aerial, Ascari and Caterham?)....but GM doesn't have the soul or image that is at all desirable in investor's view....I can't see how GM can get out of this one, even after billions of free money...

[BoneThug]

with the exception of the Z cars and the skyline very few of those cars still ilve up to that heritage. no one buys a gallant or a corrola because of its pedigree

[hk20000]

Originally Posted by taylor192

The new Mazda 3 is fugly, the new Cobalt is decent looking.

REALLY? Go drive one.

Mazda3 has totally upped the ante on this generation. It drives and feels very much like a premium subcompact that used to be exclusive to the european market, it feels like a Peugeot 207, it drives like a Peugeot 207 and it even looks like a Peugeot 207.


Comes with all sorts of stuff you just don't expect in a car at this price range, heated powered seats, in-dash navigation, smart key, 18" rims and all that....

the 2.5 is quite a lot more powerful than the 2.3 as well.

I rented a Cobalt LS for courtesy car and that car is the anatomy of why GM is going to ride the PHAIL boat. It's priced like a Corolla but it's far worse than a Corolla. Everything on the car feels like it's made to a budget, the steering wheel is numb, the gear change is bad there is no control for 2nd and 3rd gear because the gear pattern is PRNDIL what the hell is I? You have 0 control into what gear it's going to use when you slot it in I...The gear gates are vague (yes I'm talking about automatic!) and I can't be sure what gear I'm in without looking down. Once you look down it's just another bit of disappoinment, the gear indicator is basically a piece of red paper that's slid under the plastic window.....in 2009? Come on....

Every time I get into the car I'm very glad and very depressed at the same time. I'm depressed that I can't afford a better car, but I'm glad it's not really my car. There is no "pleasant surprise" after I sunk some miles into it either.... A corolla is actually surprising that it handles quite truthfully to your inputs, and you can enjoy playing with it somewhat. The Cobalt - WTF? I don't know about the SS but the base LS chassis is so unsorted I don't know where to start.

The seats are fat and wide and thick, making rear seats super uncomfortable because the knee room is compromised... the trunk is not small but the opening is.

It just doesn't feel like it's a product that has gone through enough time in the R&D lab. R&D+cheap material can still be decent, but no R&D = no way is the product going to end up ok....Just my 2 cents.

That's what's been putting GM and Chrysler cars into a tight spot now - less money, less R&D, less quality, less buyers less money. It's a viscous cycle that will eventually eat them alive.

The 2009 Ford Focus my sister rented was ooooo kkkkkkkk but I still wouldn't own one. It does come with satellite radio, pretty good stereo and some oomph when you press the loud pedal. Ford Focus is a good car for its money. But it has the image problem like GM and Chrysler just coz they make so many rentals.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by hk20000

Beauty is in the eye of beer-holder.

Fixed

Originally Posted by hk20000

If you think of cars as more than "presence" and appreciate their contribution to the automotive world, there is a lot more to write about for German/Japanese auto than US/British automobiles (other than maybe the Mini?)

Agreed.

Originally Posted by hk20000

Just coz those Yanks speak the loudest in the international stage doesn't mean they made the best automobile....And people know that all too well now to still buy them. I can't see how GM can get out of this one, even after billions of free money...

America has one thing going for it: pride.

Americans proudly display their flags, and once they realize new GMs are just as reliable and stylish, they'll be loving domestic cars again.

The imports had their chance to flourish in America with unfair import taxation and associated domestic cost-cutting of the 80s and 90s. This crisis will finally level the playing field, then game's on.

[orange7]

noo.. please stay GM!!

I actually like the corvette, even though i wouldn't buy it if i have the money.. unless i'm a billionair! ahah

but seriously.. corvette is the gtr killer.. with that gone.. gtr fanboys would be jumping

[orange7]

i like the new mazda 3 and 6...