NuncoStr8

those things are all true if you are a Honda fanboi.

They are not true if you actually have experience with American and Japanese cars. You get more car for your dollar when new, and even more when used because MSRP is hardly ever what you pay. Someone trading in an American car doesn't need as much back as someone trading in a Japanese brand of equivalent value, because THEY DIDN'T PAY AS MUCH. It's really not rocket science.

And in my experience having owned many American and a few Japanese cars, including many with high mileage, American cars easily last longer than their Japanese counerparts. You just don't see that many Toyotas actually survive past 150K in my experience, but it's rare for an American engine to fail catastrophically.

You can argue the point but it's a waste of time. You act like nobody could possibly argue with what you say. Obviously, looking at facts is not an exercise you are familiar with. Do you really think the huge number of American trucks on the road and the fact that nobody else seems capable of producing a line that is even remotely competitive indicates an inferior product? And if American truck manufacturing across the board is superior than anything coming from Japan, why would American passenger cars be somehow handicapped?

Why would Toyota be making their cars more and more like American cars if the people in charge thought American cars were truly inferior? Why did every automotive journalist call the Toyota Avalon a "Buick" from Japan if Japanese auto makers really had nothing to learn from US makers? Why does Buick for that matter constantly top so-called reliability charts along with Lexus, when Lexus is a premium brand and Buick is just a middle grade family car? Basically, Lexus being a top of the line product from Japan is not really much better than an American basic family sedan. How is that if American cars are so crappy?

How is it that Ford can sell a highly regarded RWD V8 sports car for the same or less money as Japanese companies sell V6's? What's the deal there? If Ford, GM, and Chrysler are so backwards and inept, why are their sports car products so head and shoulders above anything to come out of Japan? I mean, cars like the Corvette and the Viper are so good, yet apparently I'm supposed to believe their designers and makers are incapable of good work?

American car makers are so inferior they happen to top sales charts year after year after year. Whenever a company from a different country beats one of them it's time for gloating, making it clear that pretty much everyone sees topping US auto makers in sales is a big deal. Yet how can it be a big deal if they can't make a car worth selling? How do you explain their success if they aren't successful at making cars? How can you point to Toyota or Honda or VW sales numbers as proof of some sort of superiority without acknowledging the sales numbers of US makers is proof of a much longer term superiority and deserved market dominance?

IMHO you're merely repeating things you've read or been told and nobody has ever argued the point. You don't have any actual experience with the things you claim. You might trade stories with your friends about some guy who's friend once had a car that was a lemon, but if you really pay attention, many people even on this site are not super happy with their Honda products.

Cue the blustering and nonsensical brand whoring.

JonBoy

[QUOTE=NuncoStr8,Nov 20 2009, 01:49 AM]those things are all true if you are a Honda fanboi.

JonBoy

How long ago was this?

rockville

That was in 2000 when I bought my Contour SVT instead of an Accord. The Ford dealer experience was so bad I almost walked out and had all but resigned my self to getting the Honda. I figured the Honda was a safe choice because I could dump it easily and not lose much. The Ford however, was a car I loved to drive. When I sold the Ford 3 years later (not for any quality issue but because I decided I needed a 5 door) I compared how much I sold it for vs how much I predicted the Accord would have cost (based on CarDirect pricing) and how much I think it would have sold for (based on similar used cars). My estimates were about a wash with what I actually did with the Ford. I know that's a sample of 1 and the Honda numbers are based on estimates. The thing that saved the Ford's resale was the near $3000 I got off at purchase time. The Accord discounts weren't nearly as big.

Also, I disagree that Ford hasn't proven their long term reliability. With the current models I think Ford can now say they are basically on par with Honda and Toyota. The cars of the last few years have proven to be very good and even the Fords from about 8-10 years back are good enough to suggest that the current ones (which have shown short term reliability improvements) will be just fine over the long haul. With Ford the issue now is convincing skeptical buyers.

ltswb

Wow, Nunco, your post is so full of fail that I don't even think I have the energy to try to unravel it. Thank you Jonboy for trying.

I guess since you called me a fanboi and told me what kind of experience I have (even though you know nothing about me), then I must automatically be completely wrong.

By the way, the small Toyota truck is the number 1 selling vehicle of all time. They are indestructible. So much so that Top Gear dedicated an entire episode to trying to destroy one. When you watch the world news, you always see them flying around the desert, or tundra, or jungle. The reason domestics rule the full size truck market in this country is not because of reliability. Its because they have a 100 year head start on building big trucks and building owner loyalty. They also happen to be cheaper than the imports. But I will tell you that I live in the number 1 full sized truck market on Earth and I'm seeing more and more Tundras every day. Even the redneck, jack em up, mud boggers are buying them.


( the reason I am a Honda "fanboi" is because I have owned several domestics. My grandfather, who fought in WW2 and had friends and family killed by the Japanese, drives only Hondas now. I wouldn't call him a fanboi of anything Japanese. He just realizes a good car when he sees it)

NuncoStr8

um, aren't you the hypocrite who said he was gonna put me on ignore? You know, where you were taking me to task for not having driven the Genesis while you are writing off anything from a US maker without having even sat in it? The guy making assumptions about who I am and what I would think of a Hyundai without knowing anything about me at all?

Yeah, that's you, the self-described expert on all things automotive, expecially sports cars. What is it you drive again? What kind of cars have you had again? Get back to me when you have a little experience in something you didn't read about in Consumer Reports. You sound like someone who has only ever owned one fast car and since it was Japanese, all things Japanese are the best.

I'd love to take the time to do a point by point reply, but I'm not getting paid to do so. I'm not saying Japanese cars suck. I'm trying to point out the hypocrisy, the ignorance and blindness in saying across the board all things Japanese are better than all things American. It's almost like people don't realize how stupid that attitidue makes them look.

Oh and your points? They're all weak. Cherry-picking comes to mind. You think old people buy Buicks. Who do you think buys Lexus?

NuncoStr8

Apparently when you go on about reliability you don't realize that what is commonly measured as "reliability" is actually repair cost. And cars made of cheap parts win that contest every time. It has nothing to do with how many times they need fixing.

Now I'd rather not have to fix a car. But if I have to, I'd rather it not be a bunch of piddly things that nickle and dime me. I'd almost rather it be one bigger hit very infrequently. But as long as magazines calculate reliability the way they do, and as long as people like you don't stop to think about what they are really talking about, we'll be having these discussions.

All cars have wear items. All cars need routine maintenance. All cars are subject to random failures that "shouldn't" happen. But the last several Fords I've owned didn't have a single issue like that. Nor did the Buicks I've owned. Can't say the same about my Honda or Toyota. The Chrysler was a wash - I'd rather pay to occasionally fix a car I like to drive, and the issue was a head gasket on a turbo 4 with 130,000+ miles on it. Kind of remarkable it lasted as long as it did.

So at the end of the day, you do the math. Should I take your word that Hondas are super-reliable, or my own experience that says Japanese cars are not as dependable as say a Ford or Buick?

And if you ask me, "fail" is what you get when you lack the personal experience to make rational judgements so you resort to saying whatever the magazines tell you to say.

ltswb

You're an idiot. Please tell me what my personal experience is since you seem to know it better than I. And while you are at it, tell me what reliability tests I am quoting, or what magazines I am reading. Your latest post about the "meaning" of reliability is so circular that I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Which ones break down more? Which ones cost more to fix? I can't figure out what your point is.

To me, reliability and dependability are based on how long the car goes before it breaks down and is unusable without repair, or has a major system malfunction. And as I said, the reason I buy Honda is because I've owned domestics. Not because I read some report. BTW, you're the one who quoted the reliability reports not me.

NuncoStr8

I'm an idiot? That's the best you can do?

Go back and read my post again. See, we agree about what reliability means.

Now, did you know that when a magazine says Car A is "more reliable" than Car B," they aren't saying it breaks down less, they are saying it's cheaper to fix. It has nothing to do with what you and I think of as "reliability."

That is my point. And according to my extensive experience with them, American cars are very reliable. My limited experience with Japanese cars says they are more likely to have either electrical issues or premature catastrophic engine failure than American cars. Now I had a small sample of Japanese cars, so I'm not saying Japanese cars are inferior across the board. I am just *really* not disposed to buy the claim that they are somehow better as a class of vehicle.

Notice I am not calling you an idiot just because your opinions are different than mine.

nashi_taro

SHO: Making mechanics out of ordinary people since 1989. I love my daily driven '94 taurus sho