CNN Money is reporting that Toyota has dropped from first to fifth place in Consumer Reports' (CR) ranking of average predicted reliability for all models sold under a given brand after one year of ownership. ToMoCo now slots beneath Honda, Acura, Scion and Subaru. What's worse, CR no longer recommends V6 Camrys or V8 Tundra full-size pickups due to their poor reliability. And the hits keep happening. CR says the results are so rad/bad they're changing their "free ride" methodology. Before now, Consumer Reports would assume at least average reliability for Toyota's new cars, without waiting for owner survey data. From now on, the magazine will wait for a full year of reliability survey data before recommending a Toyota product. As it does with most other manufacturers. As it should have from the git-go. Meanwhile, of the domestics, only Buick made it into CR's top ten, although Ford and Mercury are climbing CR's brand reliability charts (to 13th and 11th respectively). Of the 39 cars rated "most reliable," the domestics scored just four nods. Of the 44 "least reliable" models, The Big 2.8 accounted for 20. And the biggest loser is… the Solstice, with 234 percent less reliability than CR's statistical average. Pontiac's once red-hot roadster just beat the Cadillac Escalade EXT for the bottom position. CR reckons the 'Slade is 220 percent less reliable than average. That doesn't sound good.
[TTAC data provider truedelta analyzes CR's methodology here.]
Does Honda still get the free ride? It’s tough being above or at average when cars are gradually becoming more reliable.
This finding with the V6/6AT Camry isn’t unprecedented – a couple of Toyotas have recently bombed CR reliability ratings but haven’t gotten much press. The ones that come to mind are the 1st year of the current gen 4Runner as well as its twin GX470. In the meantime, so much for the 6AT with fewer parts than the 5AT it replaced.
FWIW, TrueDelta ranks the 07 Camry more reliable than the 07 Aura but does make note of differences between the I4, V6, and Hybrid which did not reach statistical significance.
My question would be whether Toyota has been dragged down by a particular group of models (i.e. trucks), or a particular group of workers (i.e. non-Nippon), or is it an across the board decline?
Hang on, “predicted reliability”?
What does that mean?
If Toyota hasn't already heeded the call to arms, they better do so now. They have traded on the fact their reliability can be taken for granted and their recent record has damaged that reputation. Heads should roll.
Katie: It sort of means the same as “You won’t get pregnant, I swear”.
hltguy,
so it’s a meaningless statement which nullifies this survey?
Katie: It is meaningless, but it serves a purpose, like I stated above.
What it doesn’t say much about is how unreliable the cars actually are, as in how many defects/problems per whatever amount of cars are reported. So what I want to know is has Toyota gotten worse or have other companies gotten better? Basically they are rating the reliability with percent better or worse than average, so it doesn’t really say how reliable the cars actually are.
Last Spring my mechanic predicted Toyota was due for a major quality reassessment based on a big jump in Toyota repairs at his shop. He was right on the money.
This is the first major stumble by an Asian automaker, and it’s a doozie. If I were marketing the new Chevy Malibu I would be salivating at the prospect of capitalizing on it. Who will pay a premium for a Toyota now?
Now what Bible will Toyota salesmen wave in the face of customers who are wavering on a purchase of their product?
CR either needs to open up their methodology or continue to suffer the slings and arrows. This small admission won’t help matters.
This Toyota news has been building for some time. Sludge, transmission hestitation issues are signs of eroding quality. I think the CR news is only the start.
Not surprised by Ford’s quality rise either—Mulally’s leadership and focus on quality seems to be paying off.
When, year after year after year after year after year, as WAS the case, Toyota (and Honda) cars vitually always (notice I did not say “always”) came up trumps in all reliability categories with the public after being surveyed for same by CR, CR “got lazy” and did what anyone else would have done in the same circumstances – make assumptions on past experiences.
Toyota and Honda vehicles are reliable. Year after year. We can “predict” this (read: assume).
Now, Toyota is trying to build themselves up to #1 in the world and have goals to increase production, reduce costs and keep quality improving. As the saying goes “pick any two.”
It’s obvious that reliability has suffered – but in reality, going from an A+ to an A is truly a pity – however, having major competition moving up from an F (failure) to a D- and then boasting that they are “catching up with that Toyota!” is a bit more than a little bit misleading.
Have a peek here for an interesting viewpoint about Toyota and Honda quality vs. Detroit 2.8
http://www.autooninfo.net/NAEd200709MPRLetter.htm
Who will pay a premium for a Toyota now?
Plenty. It’ll take years (if Toyota stays on this road) for folks to get a message….much like it took decades for the 2.8 to continually screw people over.
Katie,
Consumer Reports makes predictions about new car reliability based on past reliability statistics of each model. (See the annual auto issue, which comes out in April [for maximum alliteration].)
Can you say turning point? Response to this from Toyota will be interested to say the least.
This goes to show how completely useless CR is regarding new vehicle purchases. Their historical data is somewhat useful. I could almost see such a rating system for new cars on existing platforms, but making assumptions about the reliability of a new car is inexcusably presumptuous, especially after a major redesign! “Predicted reliability” has given me and several of my friends hours of fodder for jokes. My favorite was the Honda Ridgeline; something completely new with an excellent rating. Unbelievable!
“This is the first major stumble by an Asian automaker”
Not really.
Just one of the first that CR has stumbled on to.
Does Toyota not being the darlings they once were of the eco, greens, save the planet types have anything to do with this? I always felt that the liberal blue states were the largest cheerleaders of them, now that they have that big truck plant in TX it seems CR feels betrayed. Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned.
glenn126: Interesting link to autoininfo, in particular the historical data. However, Mr.Bleeker does go beyond the realm of statistical best practices with his extrapolation of straight lines based on as few as 2 data points or as far as 140 years! As a result his predictions should be taken with the proverbial grain of salt.
Like Dave M said, its gonna take years of this to make a damn bit of difference. Look how long it took the big 2.8 to screw themselves over in quality and public perception of quality.
Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned.
Yes, it’s been a very difficult 7 years.
the biggest loser is… the Solstice
Toyota may have declined, but to have a marquee car like the Solstice come out on the bottom? GM for chrissake….
I think this fits with what we’ve been seeing recently. JD Power, Strategic Vision, PIN and now CR. Honda seems to have broken away from Toyota with their slips. Ford seems to be quickly narrowing the gap, especially with select products (Fusion/Milan) while overall reliability is improving in the industry. You can question CR’s methodology and JD Power’s and anyone else’s, but at some point you have to admit that all these “flawed” surveys are basically coming to similar conclusions.
Kudos to Honda and Ford in this recent survey.
OK, so Toyota is having some problems and getting some well deserved bad press for them. Does that mean it is the end of the world? We need to be careful how this issue is played out. Believe it or not this could have a negative effect on the big 2.8 also.
Although it might hurt Toyota’s image amoung the USA patriotic crowd Toyota could easily place the blame on it US manufacturing effort and simple say that the workers and suppliers in the USA are just not up to the task of making proper Toyota vehicles like those still coming out of Japan.
In all honesty Toyota diehards have always claimed that the vehicles Toyota imports into the USA are better made than those being built domestically. Now there is some truth to this arguement, witness the fact that the Lexus Toyotas imported from Japan are still top notch in quality.
Toyota can being to move production of key products and components back to Japan or to other markets. This would actually make many Toyota fans very happy. By putting the blame on US manufacturing Toyota can erode confidence and hurt the sales of GM, Ford, and Chysler at the same time.
On another note all of the transplant products being built in the USA whether by BMW, MB, Toyota, Nissan, etc are build to a lower standard than those coming out of the home countries. Considering that all of these manufactureres setup shop over here to cut costs what did we expect?
For those here that seem to jump for joy at any sign of trouble at Toyota, please remember Toyota is now a major US manufacturer (like it or not). A lack of quality involving Toyota’s US production looks bad for our manufacturing economy in general. Today made in the USA is becoming synonymous with poor quality, rushed production, and apathetic overpaid workers. We need to change our way of thinking and start re-introducing pride back into our work. Those BMWs coming out of SC, those MBs being built in Alabama, and those Kentucy Toyotas need to be the better than the porducts coming out of Germany and Japan. Maybe this is what we need for Americans to begin to feel comfortable with the rest of our domestically built cars.
Interesting timing. I’m due to pick up my Dad’s Avalon from the shop later this afternoon for diagnosing a tapping sound coming from the engine. And don’t get me started on the transmission; By far the worst autobox I have ever had the displeasure to experience.
The Avalon is about 18 months old, and it has been in the shop numerous times for a variety of reasons. Certainly not the Toyota we thought we would be buying.
Toyota has certainly won the contest to be the next GM. Driving the Avalon this morning, I was astounded with its creaking, rattling, aching, shuddering and clueless gear shifting and non-existent handling.
I’m not so sure anymore that Toyota has was it takes to be the Toyota of former lore.
whatdoiknow1: Now that’s what I call an ad campaign:
“GM: because even foreign cars made in America are just as bad.”
In all honesty Toyota diehards have always claimed that the vehicles Toyota imports into the USA are better made than those being built domestically. Now there is some truth to this arguement, witness the fact that the Lexus Toyotas imported from Japan are still top notch in quality
They say that, while ignoring the fact that Honda has been churning out Civics, Accords, etc. out of their Ohio plants for nearly 30 years with no difference in quality between what’s made here and what’s brought in by ship. Not as much truth as one would think, I believe.
Thanks for the link, RF.
Good to see CR will no longer automatically recommend Toyotas.
TrueDelta reported that the Camry V6 was experiencing a high repair rate back in August. The problem is with the Japanese-engineered and -manufactured transmission.
We’ll always be months, sometimes even a year ahead of them, because of prompt quarterly updates. For example, we’ll have a result for the 2008 Buick Enclave next month. CR won’t have a result until a year from now.
Many of you are already participating in this research. Thanks, I appreciate it. If you’re not participating, I hope you’ll consider doing so. Sample sizes are the main advantage CR retains.
Details on the research:
http://www.truedelta.com/reliability.php
Looking through the comments, I see a few that chalk this up to U.S. workers.
To repeat, the problematic Camry V6 transmission is all Japanese. And they also knocked the Japanese-made Lexus GS.
American vs. Japanese has nothing to do with it.
One person also credited Mulally for Ford’s improvement. Sorry, but this improvement all happened based on work that occurred before he arrived. Select Fords have been looking good in both TrueDelta’s and CR’s results for a year or more now.
Okay, I just read the article, and I gotta say: your summary, and the CNN headline, is grossly misleading.
Let’s Look at who leads Toyota in the rankings:
1. Honda
2. Acura (a Honda brand)
3. Scion (a Toyota brand)
4. Subaru
So there are only 2 independent companies represented above the “Toyota” brand, and only one company above the first Toyota group brand.
I’m sorry, this doesn’t look like a “tumble” to me – let’s bear in mind the following:
a) There may be no statistical difference between 1st and 5th in a study like this
b) By my estimation Toyota is actually somewhere between 2nd and 3rd, not 5th.
c) Even if you believe the rankings are statistically significant, Honda and Subaru may have stepped up, rather than Toyota falling down.
But it does make for good copy, even if it’s not true.
Ford has been revamping its quality procedures for several years now…it looks as though they are finally bearing fruit. But this effort began before Mullaly arrived on the scene. Give the much-reviled William Clay Ford, Jr., credit for sticking with – and really pushing – the quality improvement program.
As for Toyota not being immediately hurt by this – I wouldn’t count on it. It took years before declining sales reflected the decline in GM’s quality, but that was before the internet. Now bad news travels exceptionally fast. Two decades ago we probably wouldn’t have heard about the Toyota sludge problem unless we owned one or worked at a Toyota dealership.
Plus, there is lots more competition today. If you got burned by GM 30 years ago, your other choices were basically…Ford, Chrysler and AMC. Which was often little more than jumping from the frying pan into the fire. At that time, the foreign marques sold at the fringes of the market – the high end and the low end.
That’s not the case today. Disgruntled Toyota customers have MANY more mainstream choices.
quasimondo :
October 16th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
In all honesty Toyota diehards have always claimed that the vehicles Toyota imports into the USA are better made than those being built domestically. Now there is some truth to this arguement, witness the fact that the Lexus Toyotas imported from Japan are still top notch in quality
They say that, while ignoring the fact that Honda has been churning out Civics, Accords, etc. out of their Ohio plants for nearly 30 years with no difference in quality between what’s made here and what’s brought in by ship. Not as much truth as one would think, I believe.
So very true, Hondas have continued to get better and surpass Toyotas in build quality over the last 15 years. Today the Camry is sorry competition for the Accord. It is sad because I feel Toyota did pull a “GM” on the Camry buy lowering the quality to beat the Accord in price.
This is big mistake (in the long run) because very few buyers are going to haggle over a $1500- $2000 price difference when the Accord truly looks and feel like the more expensive and better built of the two. Both Toyota and Honda need to always consider that the quality of their cars in the 5 year old used car market WILL effect the sales of new vehicles. For most folks were I come from their first car is 95% percent of the time a used one. Just by looking a the current Camry and the 07 Accord I get the feeling that the Accord will be the car to buy 5 years from now.
Consumer Reports makes a big fuss about the new Toyota Tundra: in V8, 4WD version it gets a black dot, 70% worse than average reliability. At the same time the Toyota Tundra V8, 2WD gets a best in class red dot (50% better than average).
How can that be, since both vehicles are pretty much the same, with the same engines, etc., except for the 4WD system?
In the breakout for each subsystem CR gives a white dot (average) to the drive system of the 4WD and a red dot (highest rating) for the drive system of the 2WD. Okay, so I can understand this to lead to a lower overall rating for the 4WD, but is this enough to bump it from best in class to worst in class?
Strangely, in a large number of categories the 4WD scores lower than the 2WD, namely for engine major, engine minor, fuel system, electrical system, suspension, brakes, body hardware, power equipment and audio system. That surprises me, since both vehicles are basically the same!
I’m a subscriber to Consumer Reports, but I’m really puzzled by their methodology here. What is the truth about the Consumer Reports survey? What are the survey questions, anyway?
Why in the world would the audio system on 4WD score lower than the audio system on a 2WD?
Oh, and by the way, the survey was made in spring 2007, while the Tundra just started selling. How can they have collected a statistically significant sample from such a small population?
So how much did the “not so big three” paid CR to cook up a story like this against Toyota…I guess they’ll try anything to bring down Toyota. Lets see what happens next.
Yeah, of course Detroit paid off CR because Toyotas are infallible and unbreakable, right?
To everyone that says Toyota is a now a domestic manufacturer, this article proves it. Not from declining levels of reliability on some models but because now every little misstep, every little tumble in quality will warm the cockles of journalists’ hearts. Bad news sells and everyone likes to take a bite out of number one. ToMoCo can hit the bar at the airport and drown their sorrows next to GM and Ford. :)
In my mind, Honda isn’t beating Toyota at just making more reliable cars. Its bread-and-butter cars are just so much better all across the board.
Fit vs. Yaris?
Civic vs. Corolla?
new Accord vs. Camry?
Accord Coupe vs. Solara?
The only place it’s any contest is the Minivans.
Toyota does have the edge on trucks though.
I don’t see the problem with Consumer Report’s previous policy of assuming that Toyota’s were reliable. Since CR’s policy of recommending vehicles is based upon a combination of (a) the vehicle’s ability to pass CR’s subjective test and (b) the user survey indicating reliability of at least average or better, and since Toyota’s had traditionally outperformed just about everyone, then it made sense to accept the statistical reality that Toyotas invariably were consistently reliable.
I likewise have no problem with CR changing its editorial position in light of recent reliability survey results. It also makes sense for CR to raise the bar if Toyota’s latest offerings aren’t so consistent. If anything, it shows that CR is fairly clinical in its approach and that its survey methodology is reasonably fair.
I have no bone to pick with True Delta per se, but I don’t believe that Mr. Karesh does himself any favors by trying to promote his survey by critiquing someone else’s. If the goal of CR is to measure reliability on the basis of how a given product compares to an “average”, then it makes perfect sense to use a relative scale. It’s akin to using a bell curve, with the well-above and well-below-average rankings sitting at the extreme ends, and the average at the mid-point. Providing a percentage scale to accompany it, as CR does, makes it clear enough how “average” is defined.
If one is to use an absolute scale, the question becomes: who decides what “average” is? I may find True Delta’s vision of “average” to be terrific, appalling stringent, or ridiculously weak, depending upon my personal point of view. The “absolute” scale in effect becomes the scale of whoever chose it, which in the case of True Delta I suppose means that we are bound to follow Mr. Karesh’s definition of what is acceptable and what is not. And I see no particularly compelling reason why one person’s opinion should have greater weight than the actual distribution of the bell curve.
That’s not to say that Mr. Karesh’s opinion can’t be valid. But at least CR allows me to rank the vehicles and decide for myself what range of results is acceptable and which results are not. If below average is good enough for me or if only the well above average will do, so be it — just tell me the percentages that each represent, as CR does, and I will make that determination for myself.
EJ: Strangely, in a large number of categories the 4WD scores lower than the 2WD, namely for engine major, engine minor, fuel system, electrical system, suspension, brakes, body hardware, power equipment and audio system. That surprises me, since both vehicles are basically the same!
I’m a subscriber to Consumer Reports, but I’m really puzzled by their methodology here. What is the truth about the Consumer Reports survey? What are the survey questions, anyway?
I can remember puzzling over this same sort of thing in the mid-’60s. I loved GM, hated Chrysler, and I would comb CR for slant and illogic, as Chrysler routinely came out on top. I remember finding a similar difference between Chevy 8 cyl and 6 cyl. I can still only guess, but it’s possible (in both cases) that the owners of 2wd or 6cyl treat their cars differently from the owners of Awd or 8cyl. The 8cyl chevies, if memory serves, didn’t rust as badly as the sixes. Maybe the eights got garaged more, or washed more to get the salt off. Maybe the 4wd owners are more likely to take their trucks off road and beat them. Then again… Michael Karesh, any thoughts???
David Holzman: it’s possible [..] that the owners [..]treat their cars differently
Quite possible. It could be that 4WD Tundra owners immediately beat the dirt roads with their new trucks, unlike 2WD owners. If that’s true, it could lead to the dreadful (for Toyota) conclusion that the Tundra is sort of a ‘fair weather’ truck, not really rugged enough for real work.
But we’re speculating here. To find out the truth about this you would need to know a lot more about Tundra customers and their habits. And the Consumer Reports survey should be corrected for ‘heavy’ and ‘light’ use.
This is the same CR that rated the Sable so much higher than the Taurus coming off the same line.
I once knew a guy whose Accord was constantly in the shop. Yet the guy loved it, incessantly singing its praises as the best car he had ever owned. Yet during the first couple years it was in the garage almost as much as it was being driven.
I’m sure this guy would have given the Accord the very highest rating in CR.
I’m sure we all know people like this, who swear by the Camry, yet have problems with it.
I happen to disagree with the CR report, they rely on subscribers of the Magazine to rate the vehicles!
I do know that over the years Toyota has been taking good things off there vehicles a example is Drum brakes vs the better ones! also trim has been downgraded, I drive a 2001 Camry Ce, a very basic vehicle, I do not spend days and hours in a Service center with it as I do with my GMC Van, compared to my Van its an excellent vehicle.
?I’m a subscriber to Consumer Reports, but I’m really puzzled by their methodology here. What is the truth about the Consumer Reports survey? What are the survey questions, anyway?”
Uh, if you are a subscriber then they send you a big survey form every year. The answers people give to that survey are the raw data for the annual reliability data crunch.
For years now Honda has been building mostly better vehicles than the competing Toyotas. Many folks here sneeringly refer to Camcords. Camry and Accord are no more alike than the Fusion and Malibu are.
As far as why different versions of the same vehicle can score so differently, there are many reasons. First of course is owner reporting bias. A GMC pickup truck buyer may think they bought a better truck than the equivalent Chevy and may thus be biased to report more favorably on it. Ditto for Mercury vs. Ford. Different versions of a vehicle may typically have very different options included. V6 Camrys are generally more highly equipped than the 4 cylinder versions, so if Toyota was having problems with leaking sunroofs it might effect the V6 ratings more than the 4 cylinder. Sometimes different factories have different quality levels and build different configuration vehicles. In 2003, for example, many 4 cylinder Accords came from Japan while many V6 Accords came from Ohio (in that case their reported reliability was, however, very similar).
Finally, of course, are the particular obvious differences of different engines, transmissions, etc.
Many car buffs love to throw stones at CR, but nobody else publishes as much comprehensive information as they do. I don’t blindly follow CR recommendations, but I do take their data into consideration when making big ticket purchases. Their methodology is pretty clear if you take the time to read and think. Yes they don’t publish the raw data or the numbers, but I suspect they don’t because copyright law doesn’t cover data and they would be mighty pissed to see third parties regurgitating their work.
Historically Toyota and Honda have consistently made best-in-class vehicles reliability wise. Consequently, new models with high road test scores from these companies could get the “check rated, recommended” label from CR without needing to prove their reliability. Other new vehicles from companies with poor or inconsistent reliability track records would have to wait until enough data was in hand demonstrating that they have at least average reliability scores before getting the recommended label. In cases where the data comes in and a vehicle scores worse than average than the recommended labels is pulled off.
For anyone who bothers to read the actual CR review of a vehicle this is clear. It isn’t complicated or unreasonable.
PS If Solstice/Sky don’t get a TWAT award this year something is wrong :).
I judge from a lot of comments such as this that a lot of the critics of Consumer Reports here have never actually read it:
I’m sure this guy would have given the Accord the very highest rating in CR.
I happen to disagree with the CR report, they rely on subscribers of the Magazine to rate the vehicles!
These statements are factually wrong. CR does not ask those surveyed to “rate” their vehicles. Those surveyed are given a list of categories (engine, body hardware, etc.), and are asked to check a box if the car has had at least one problem in each of those categories. It’s these questions that get translated into red and black circles in the reliability survey.
That’s it. Except for one question at the end to query owner satisfaction, the reader is not asked to rank anything. And that one question is reported separately and does not impact the red and black circles of the reliability survey.
It’s a pretty simple survey, which is good because it ensures a high response rate. (Having conducted surveys, I can tell you firsthand that long surveys end up with inaccurate responses because respondents hurry through them and their attention spans start to drift after a few minutes.) Yes, CR surveys its subscribers because with 2 million subscribers, that should yield a pretty good sample size, which is important when getting an accurate result.
And unless you have some reason to believe that GM goes out of its way to sell its worst Cobalts to CR readers, there isn’t much reason not to believe the results. There should be enough vehicles owned by a readership pool as large as CR’s to get a pretty good idea of how these cars endure over the long run. You can and should combine it with data from other sources in order to get an idea of what to expect, and not just rely on it exclusively.
Heads have already rolled at Toyota. Toyota has already taken some big steps to boost quality back up to earlier levels. Now it’s only a matter of time until we see the fruits of Toyota’s new quality efforts.
It does not matter whether you are talking CR or JD Power—all surveys have their flaws. CR may have 2 million subscribers—-but it is not a scientific sample from a pure market research standpoint. Said another way—it is a self selected sample (vs a random general market sample).
That said, if one were to look at all of the reliability surveys—-there is plenty of overlap in results between them and stronger conclusions can be drawn rather than just relying on one source for information. As far as Toyota—there has been ample news besides surveys (recalls, TSB’s etc) related to their quality slip against most of their new launches—knowing Toyota—they will address these issues quickly.
To continue about the discrepancy between 2WD and 4WD rating for the Tundra. Consumer Reports listed their sample size: “We had 944 2WD V8 Tundras and 1259 4WD V8 ones.”
So, if they had ~4% defect rate for the 4WD, they had about 50 vehicles with at least one problem and fewer than that with a serious problem in the 4WD drive train. Cause for real concern?
So, if they had ~4% defect rate for the 4WD, they had about 50 vehicles with at least one problem and fewer than that with a serious problem in the 4WD drive train. Cause for real concern?
Of course there should be cause for concern. With a sample size that large, you can fairly extract that about one out of every 25 owners of these vehicles is going to have an issue in this category.
For any automaker, that would not be impressive. For an automaker whose major brand virtues are centered on quality and reliability, this has the makings for brand suicide if not addressed promptly and thoroughly. Consumers will happily pay a premium for Toyotas and give them top consideration because of their quality; TMC can’t afford to blow this.