TTAC's no apologist for any automaker. And we're big fans of the editorial equivalent of the arched eyebrow. But we call foul over Motor Trend 's coverage of Toyota's decision to extend its warranties on Tacoma pickups sold between 1995 and 2000 due to problems with rust. The mag's online scribe Andrew Streiber reports the facts– well, edits the press release slightly– with studied impartiality. "Though Toyota says the problems have been limited to trucks in states where salt is used to de-ice roads in winter, the company is extending rust-perforation warranty coverage to all 1995-2000 Tacomas regardless of location. The coverage will last 15 years from the original date of sale with no mileage cap. Owners who think they may have a rust problem can simply visit a dealer for a free inspection, and if damage is found Toyota will either repair or repurchase the truck (they decide)." But Streiber can't resist finishing with a cheap shot. "Given the well-publicized problems in early examples of the new Tundra, it's still another blemish on their reputation for quality the company didn't need." Note to MT: if the domestics had adopted a similar approach to similar problems, they wouldn't be in the mess they're in.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
And to think that some of the "Japan can do no wrong" boys I worked with back in '97 when I bought my Ranger said that $3-4K more money for a Toyota or Nissan would have been money well spent! Ford is nuts to abandon te Ranger.If I ran their advertising, the airwaves would be full of images of good-looking older Rangers. I'd make sure the world knew that my vehicle was a better product at a lower price.
My 2000 Ranger is rusting quite heavily.
Maybe when Ford gets the parts to hook my cruise control back up they will fix the rust?
And this repair or buy-back program shows Toyota cares about its customers.
Show me one domestic manufacturer that would cover something for 15 years as a gesture of good faith.
Remember the Chrysler/GM paint issues? Think they’d go back and cover that for 15 years?
How about the Ford recalls that were forced instead of voluntary?
Gestures like this by Toyota are what keeps people coming back to them. They may screw up every now and then, but they willingly correct/recall issues once they recognize them.
Note to MT: if the domestics had adopted a similar approach to similar problems, they wouldn’t be in the mess they’re in.
This is just ONE reason. The list of reasons why the domestics are in the mess they are in is LONG and would take up too much space here. What it comes down to is this: The mess the domestics are in is mostly (99%???) their fault and they have no one to blame but themselves. All three domestics are terribly mismanaged. For proof, just look at the financial condition (mainly losses) and sales figures to prove it. And i’ll bet FoMoCo won’t be profitable by 2009 and may never be profitable again (unless it has better management)which i don’t see happening. The best thing for FoMoCo right now would be to have it taken out of Ford family control. That family is running Henry Ford’s company into the ground slowly but surely.
15 year coverage with no mileage cap ? A PR master stroke for Toyota.
Remember the Chrysler/GM paint issues? Think they’d go back and cover that for 15 years?
If I recall correctly, GM offered it as a five-year window in which owners of the vehicles with the crappy primer could bring them in.
And when I say crappy primer I mean it. I remember my dad repainting one of his 80s Chev 1/2 tons and had to sand the thing down to bare metal and start over. You couldn’t just rough up the existing primer and paint over it; immediately it would start to bubble on you.
86er – that’s the one I was referring too. They wouldn’t cover it for more than 5 years – that was some bad stuff they bought into (primer).
“TTAC’s no apologist for any automaker.”
I just wanted to emphasize this statement. It should assuage all our fears of the contrary.
All automakers should take care of their customers like this. As much as I am not a fan of Toyota, I must honestly say this is the right thing to do.
Maybe I’m missing something, but I fail to see the bash.
86er – that’s the one I was referring too. They wouldn’t cover it for more than 5 years – that was some bad stuff they bought into (primer).
Let the record state that it was awful, awful crap and it took centuries to sand off, to boot.
My 86 Silverado, which inspired my brilliant username, had this problem. If I recall it affected some paints worse than others, but it continued almost unabated until 1992 or 93.
It’s been 10 years so my details are a little fuzzy, but I had a friend with an older Bronco, maybe 7-10 yrs old at that time. She got a call from ford out of the blue asking about the condition of the paint. It was looking pretty rough, and Ford had it repainted for free. She was incredibly impressed and vowed to never buy anything but Ford.
I would think anyone with a 10-15 yr old vehicle in the rust belt would feel the same about this.
Got to go with TTAC on this one. If the domestics did this kind of thing for their customers they wouldn’t have lost so many.
On the other hand “And this repair or buy-back program shows Toyota cares about its customers” is a bit too far the other way. As long as you are a quality manufacturer and don’t have to do this every other day, it’s just good business.
But then, I guess, we find out why the domestics haven’t done this. If they did for all of their quality problems, in the 80’s in particular, they wouldn’t have had the money to build more cars.
I wrote before of the front-end rebuild that ToMoCo did for my ’04 Tacoma under warranty even though the ball-joint recall inspection showed the ones in my car to be within specs. Taco’s sell about 75K a year and the owners are among the most loyal (this one is my 4th.) The resale values for these trucks defy belief. You can bet Toyota is not gonna risk damaging the halo that surrounds this iconic trucklet.
I agree with TTAC. If the domestics would have stood behind their products better they would have retained more loyal customers. I bought domestic until a 1983 Ford that was a world class POS that Ford couldn’t and/or wouldn’t fix. I traded it in for a Honda and have bought foreign ever since.
Referring back to a JD Power survey that I posted here previously — most Americans who purposely avoid buying Asian cars do so because they don't like Asians. If you want to find "import bigots," this is what they look like.
When a head gasket failed on my GM van, there wasn’t any mention of “extending the warranty” or “buying back the vehicle”, even though the 3.4 has a history of this type of failure. There simply isn’t any genuine “goodwill” coming from them for their design/quality issues by comparison to Toyota. I called GMs 800 number and requested assistance – maybe YOU guys pay half? No, not happening. I told the csr I’d be buying something elsewhere and I did. Customers aren’t flocking into GM showrooms again why? Colleagues mention similar issues with other domestics, not just GM. Think about the timeframe – 15 years, somebody stepped up to the plate.
barberous:
I agree with TTAC. If the domestics would have stood behind their products better they would have retained more loyal customers. I bought domestic until a 1983 Ford that was a world class POS that Ford couldn’t and/or wouldn’t fix. I traded it in for a Honda and have bought foreign ever since.
My last domestic POS was a 1983 Ford Tempo. It spent more time at the dealer(s) than one the road (i went to every dealer in my area) for problems Ford never could/would fix. I too traded it for a Honda and have bought that brand exclusively since and have had not ONE quality problem or any repairs needed other than standard replacement item that wear out. (I’ve recently puchased my 6th Honda, never gave the domestics ANY consideration). One BIG difference between the domestic 2.8 and the Asians is this : Profits !!!! The 2.8 put profits first, the product is second and a very, very distant 3rd is the customer. If the domestics backed their products the way the Asian’s do they would have gone bankpupt long ago just paying to fix all of their product problems from bad design and cheap parts and materials. The Asians put the customer first then profits. It is just good business practices and management. They know good and well that if they build crap and have shitty service with terrible warranty coverage they will loose customers. This is why they have such loyal customers and the 2.8 don’t (except for full size truck sales). As my grandfather used to say: Treat the customer right and they’ll come back. He had a very successful farm implement businness for over 50 yrs. Guess that should tell you why the 2.8 are sinking and sinking fast. It’s amazing how the “foreign” brands or transplants can and do build better vehicles here than the 2.8. Quality goes in quality comes out. Crap goes in crap comes out. And customers leave the domestic 2.8 !!!!!!!
It is sad that the 2.8 have painted themselves into a corner and can’t afford to do the right thing anymore. Even if they had a 180 degree change in attitude, they can’t fix it any more.
Toyota, to their credit, makes money and can afford to do this. They have enough capital, revenue, and profit to be able to afford to fix mistakes they make.
C’mon, it’s not just the domestics that have issues. Good old Mazda had an issue with 99-2000 Miata’s where some of the blocks were machined incorrectly. It is a relatively simple check that needs to be performed to make sure the crank endplay is within spec. Did Mazda send out a notice to their purchasers? No, they did put out a service bulletin to dealers in case someone came in with a bad engine. Unfortunately many Miata’s are driven few enough miles a year that they were out of warranty when the owner discovered the problem. Did Mazda know this would be the case and try to keep from having to perform warranty engine work? Perhaps. Their stand now is that a service bulletin is not to be mistaken for recognition that a problem exists. Since the affected vehicles are out of warranty for being too old regardless of mileage they are now free and clear.
Any manufacturer has issues, I’m sure Toyota has some that they haven’t dealt with in such a laudable manner as the current one.
Have to agree with quasimondo that this is an overreaction on your part, Farago. He didn’t say anything untrue. In fact, he was pretty much stating the obvious. The real important question is why it rankled you so much. The fact that you turned a mistake by Toyota into a slight against the domestics makes it harder to believe the first sentence of this blog post.
CarShark : Have to agree with quasimondo that this is an overreaction on your part, Farago. He didn’t say anything untrue. In fact, he was pretty much stating the obvious. The real important question is why it rankled you so much. The fact that you turned a mistake by Toyota into a slight against the domestics makes it harder to believe the first sentence of this blog post. As I opened the door to a discussion of media bias (gotta stop watching Law & Order during lunch), I won’t evoke the normal anti-flaming policy. I stand by TTAC’s record of reporting on all automakers. I strongly recommend you type “Toyota” into the search box at the top right corner and see what pops up. Also, read our reviews of ToMoCo (and domestic) product. We call ‘em like we see ‘em. Period. Regardless of our stance, I still maintain Motor Trend was out of order. This is not another "blemish" on Toyota’s quality rep. It is, as many commentators have pointed out, an example of their commitment to quality– and customer satisfaction.
Remember that the problem is ‘frames rusting’ not ‘body panels rusting’.
Toyota isn’t extending the warranty because it’s the right thing to do, they are extending it because some lawyers and accountants determined that it is cheaper to buy back the vehicles and crush them rather than get hit by a class action suit.
I have to agree with Quasimondo on this one, in that I don’t see the bash, either.
To put the statement into context, the article said: “Toyota is quick to point out that this is just a warranty extension and not a recall. However given the well-publicized problems in early examples of the new Tundra, it’s still another blemish on their reputation for quality the company didn’t need.”
Now, I’m no fan of Motor Tripe myself, but the sentence in question here needs to be considered in the context of the one that preceded it. The first sentence addressed Toyota’s publicly stated position on the rust issue, while the follow-on second sentence put the official announcement in the context of previous news regarding another newer truck, the Tundra. MT was making inferences about the possible impacts of negative PR impacts on the corporation, not on the vehicles themselves.
And in this case, MT has a point — these announcements may not be so good for business. Domestic truck buyers tend to be highly loyal and Toyota will need to gain their confidence if they wish to increase the number of conquest sales. Since taking this segment away from the 2.8 would be the beginning of the end for the domestics, Toyota’s success or missteps are important here, to Toyota as well as the competition.
Regardless of our stance, I still maintain Motor Trend was out of order. This is not another “blemish” on Toyota’s quality rep. It is, as many commentators have pointed out, an example of their commitment to quality– and customer satisfaction.
The fact that the frames on their trucks are rusting isn’t a blemish on their quality rep? You’re joking, right? Someone please tell me he’s joking. I don’t care that they’re extending the warranties. That’s customer service. Fine. Dandy. (insert obnoxious superlative). I’m talkin’ about quality. Well designed, engineered and made. The Toyota I used to know wouldn’t have made this mistake in the first damn place! To say that because they expertly pissed on the fire took care of the situation, it’s not a problem anymore is nothing short of the same ridiculous short-sighted logic many here have (rightfully so) accused the Big Three of.
The irony here is too funny. Isn’t this the same MT that named the Tundra its Truck of the Year?
210delray beat me to it. Looks like M/T needed some street cred so they bashed ToMoCo after cashing that TOTY check.