orangecones, strange take of yours on the brands and their respective percieved reliability. What is your reasoning for a statement like: “GM and Ford = hit or miss. you can get lucky and get a copy that will run forever without major troubles or get something just short of being a lemon. Draw your straws carefully.” Is your comparison not refering to new vehicles but rather those made in the 80s? Please clarify.

Hillarious when, for Toyota, you say, “(disregard recent Toyota recall).” Huh? Nice selective reasoning. How can you do that when comparing reliability? Shouldn’t the largest recall in history be taken into account? This just further solidifies in my head the fact that some people are still associating auto brand reliabitliy with decades-old reasoning. Dude, you really need to update your automotive knowledge. At least bring it in line with the late 90s or early 00s so you don’t come across as not knowing what you’re talking about.

orangecones, your entire reply was opinion presented as fact. If you just feel that way, then say that it is your belief. I cannot argue that point. What you happen to see on the road in your little molecule of the planet is by no means a reliable source for your numbers so I’m not even going to refute them. And when you write, that your “comment to disregard the Toyota problem is because its a very recent event and thus overall doesn’t play into long term product history,” you couldn’t be more wrong. These cars will eventually be part of Toyota’s “long term product history”. Some of them are approaching that beat-up status associated with “long term product history” already.

In any event, in complete contrast to what you claim above, this most recent fiasco of Toyota’s is of paramount importance on the topic of reliability. Older recalls are less important because they have been resolved. Toyota’s has not. Older recalls represent past mistakes. Toyota’s does not.

I cannot believe you are seriously convinced that the reliability of mid-nineties cars have a place in discussions about modern-day vehicle reliability. That is fifteen years ago. One and a half decades. Are you saying companies haven’t changed within their own classes? Some up, some down. Could your argument work for Hyundai? Lexus? Buick? I was a real Toyota fan in the early to mid 90s. I owned two of their 4x4s. Absolutley loved them. Did things with those trucks I never thought possible. When the Tacomas were introduced, I saw the difference in quality, immediately. I haven’t owned a Toyota since. I have said repeatedly on here that I will not defend decade’s-old actions by domestics and not judge imports based on what they did 1.5 decades ago either. What is happening currently is very relevant to this discussion on reliability.

I need you to clarify your piont again about why this mess, that has killed several people, is not relevant .

orangecones, my main point was in fact that mid-nineties vehicles’ reliabilities cannot be compared to current vehicles’ reliabilities as a means of substantiation. No apples to oranges. That’s my very point. I don’t see any relevance in discussing the historical reliability trends of cars that old when the existing topic of dicussion is about current recall events — that are of epic proportions. So, I asked what your descriptions were based on since they seemed considerably outdated and even unrelated.

Nissan has a really good product line and isn’t currently killing people with money-saving engineering defects. They just seem to quietly sell average to good (sometimes great) vehicles without being preoccupied with a diversionary battle for sales dominance.

It seems to me that if the guys that count the money get more power than the guys that design and engineer the cars, the product will suffer and the vicious implosion cycle begins.