2007 camry lower build quality

[Staples]

Uh oh, you have angered the Toyota fanboys.

You will have hell to pay.

 

[Pocatello]

Hopefully Toyota can fix this issues soon. I've heard the 2006 Avalon model has quality problems too.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: radioouman

Originally posted by: RossMAN
I was actually surprised that our 02 Honda Accord SE was built in Japan and not Georgetown, KY.

No it wasn't. Georgetown, KY has the Toyota plant. East Liberty, Ohio is where you car was made.

so, you don't believe that his car was built in japan?

 

[newParadigm]

But the V6 camry is 0-60 in under 6.5 seconds, pretty insane for a Family Sedan.

 

[bctbct]

Originally posted by: AnonymouseUser
I have definitely noticed the Camry's reduction in overall quality, but would still buy it over it's domestic competition.

thats because you sir, are a sucker.

 

[EXman]

I live in Georgetown Ky home of many toyotas. I drive a Mazda 5 almost all japanese. I've had in 3,000 had all four brake/hub assemblies replaced the tires replaced and now I have to go back again and because the car shimmies at 47mph which it has always done.

After selling hondas I can tell you there is no perfect car. But after my Father in law rolls 350,000 next month I'd say they are pretty darn good.

Mazda 5 has 2+2+2 seating fun to drive and cheap to insure and fuel. If Honda or toyota made something close for the price I'd be there. Rav 4 equipped like I'd like it be thousands more.

btw the crappiest Accords i saw in my time were from Japan and not the U.S.

 

[thetxstang]

Wow. I purchased a brand new, fully-loaded 2007 Camry XLE V6 just two months ago. It's got the NAV system, heated seats, etc. I haven't experienced any build quality issues -- as mentioned in the article or otherwise. To the contrary, the build quality is exceptional, much better than I've experienced in any other car I've owned.

 

[RU482]

anyone remember when GM cars were made in the US
Hey...look at that...they're climbing in the polls!!

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: NFS4
The best build Camrys were the '92-'96 models. It was all downhill after that. Toyota OVER-ENGINEERED those cars to by a fair margin and put a lot of money into development to insure that the materials used were up to snuff. Just look at the cheapness of the materials in the '97 in comparison to the '96 model.

QFT There were even articles at the time ('97) about how Toyota was rigorously "rationalizing" the manufacture of the then new Camrys to hold down production costs. It sure showed. I also agree with whoever said the '92-'96 models were the best looking, too . . . sinuous and yet substatial.

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
no, they all grow. old accords were the size of todays civics

Smaller, actually, I'm sure of it. My dad had a '78 Accord four door sedan, the first year for that model (all previous were hatchbacks), and I'm SURE that tiny little red rocket is/was smaller than the newest Civic sedans.

Christ, a female friend of mine bought a new Civic sedan hybrid. She came over at late at night to pick me up to go out (no pesky street lights where I live) and in the dark I thought the damn thing was an Accord. I'd bet any money that it is substantially biggger than my Dad's old Accord.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: AnonymouseUser
I have definitely noticed the Camry's reduction in overall quality, but would still buy it over it's domestic competition.

thats because you sir, are a sucker.

No, that is because for the last 13 years of working on new cars domestics have proven year after year to be utter sh!t. The new domestics are no better (and in fact, may be worse).

 

[AnonymouseUser]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: NFS4
The best build Camrys were the '92-'96 models. It was all downhill after that. Toyota OVER-ENGINEERED those cars to by a fair margin and put a lot of money into development to insure that the materials used were up to snuff. Just look at the cheapness of the materials in the '97 in comparison to the '96 model.

QFT There were even articles at the time ('97) about how Toyota was rigorously "rationalizing" the manufacture of the then new Camrys to hold down production costs. It sure showed. I also agree with whoever said the '92-'96 models were the best looking, too . . . sinuous and yet substatial.

One thing I have noticed is how the price of the Camry's have pretty much stayed the same (if not become cheaper) over the last 10 years...

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

JD Power is almost worthless. Their sample size is tiny, and manufacturers have very little success in trying to affect the results. Consumer Reports is much more reliable.

I hope that was sarcasm. JDpowers uses a scientific surveying and testing method, Consumer reports only surveys it readers. CR is anything but fair and honest with their opinions when it is put in their car reviews and then tries to back them up with a very unscientific survey from a base that only includes those whom buy their magazines.



But the biggest reason Toyota is having problems is not where the cars are built but more with how many they are building. Going from a small setting to what they produce now will always have growing pains. GM had the same problem but tried to pay the unions off in the 60?s and so on but that is what it hurting them now. Once Toyota slows down, which they have already done this month from reports, they can take another look and try to control the over expansion and fire growth that have had in the last 10 years, and more recently the Camry line as a whole, that is now catching up in models like the Camry.

 

[cruzer]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

But the biggest reason Toyota is having problems is not where the cars are built but more with how many they are building.

I agree, they have increased quantity at the expense of quality in a gambit to grab market share.
FWIW I bought a 2006 Solara which AFAIK is the coupe version of the Camry. I had to make a warranty claim because every time I went over a speed bump or made a sharp turn the center console lid would pop open and hit me in the right shoulder.
Now I have to go back again because the parking brake handle is scraping against the trim, leaving black plastic slivers on the floor. There are mysterious rattles in the cabin as well.
It was a big shock after having been a very satisfied owner of a '96 Avalon.

 

[Fingolfin269]

With increased market share comes increased risk. If there is a problem it could effect a great number of vehicles before being detected and the market is already flooded. It's not like it used to be for these guys.

 

[kitkit201]

The ironic thing is that when I click on the link, the sponsered ad is Toyota Time Clearance..

 

[us3rnotfound]

Originally posted by: cruzer

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

But the biggest reason Toyota is having problems is not where the cars are built but more with how many they are building.

I agree, they have increased quantity at the expense of quality in a gambit to grab market share.
FWIW I bought a 2006 Solara which AFAIK is the coupe version of the Camry. I had to make a warranty claim because every time I went over a speed bump or made a sharp turn the center console lid would pop open and hit me in the right shoulder.
Now I have to go back again because the parking brake handle is scraping against the trim, leaving black plastic slivers on the floor. There are mysterious rattles in the cabin as well.
It was a big shock after having been a very satisfied owner of a '96 Avalon.

That doesn't sound like Toyota :Q

 

[Sukhoi]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

JD Power is almost worthless. Their sample size is tiny, and manufacturers have very little success in trying to affect the results. Consumer Reports is much more reliable.

I hope that was sarcasm. JDpowers uses a scientific surveying and testing method, Consumer reports only surveys it readers. CR is anything but fair and honest with their opinions when it is put in their car reviews and then tries to back them up with a very unscientific survey from a base that only includes those whom buy their magazines.

That's not sarcasm. I'm only telling you what I've heard from upper-level management at a company that would be interested in JD Power results. The people I spoke with felt that Consumer Reports had far more reliable results than JD Power, and they were unhappy with the way JD Power conducts its operations. Before hearing that I had always thought JD Power to be a much better survey than Consumer Reports. But that's not what people in the know are saying.

 

[Pepsi90919]

Originally posted by: cruzer

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

But the biggest reason Toyota is having problems is not where the cars are built but more with how many they are building.

I agree, they have increased quantity at the expense of quality in a gambit to grab market share.
FWIW I bought a 2006 Solara which AFAIK is the coupe version of the Camry. I had to make a warranty claim because every time I went over a speed bump or made a sharp turn the center console lid would pop open and hit me in the right shoulder.
Now I have to go back again because the parking brake handle is scraping against the trim, leaving black plastic slivers on the floor. There are mysterious rattles in the cabin as well.
It was a big shock after having been a very satisfied owner of a '96 Avalon.

shoulder != elbow

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Originally posted by: NFS4
The best build Camrys were the '92-'96 models. It was all downhill after that. Toyota OVER-ENGINEERED those cars to by a fair margin and put a lot of money into development to insure that the materials used were up to snuff. Just look at the cheapness of the materials in the '97 in comparison to the '96 model.

Our '99 Camry is crap. It required a second engine at 127k km - but I won't hold that against Toyota. We bought that car used with 91k km, so who knows how it was maintained. But we bought from a Toyota dealer so I would assume they would only accepted 'good' cars.

Anyway, the interior is crap. It looks like crap aesthetically and has odd rattles. The button off the radio fell off, some of the interior panels are mis-aligned, various partscreak & rattle at highway speeds and bumpy roads, etc...the only redeeming quality is that it has very little wind noise for a car of its class & vintage.

Our '99 Maxima, by contrast, has a much nicer & better built interior, no rattles, and much more comfortable.

By contrast to both of the above, our old '91 Corolla that I abused heavily had absolutely no interior issues that the Camry has. No rattles, tight as a drum. It was a fun car to drive, even with its 3spd auto.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

JD Power is almost worthless. Their sample size is tiny, and manufacturers have very little success in trying to affect the results. Consumer Reports is much more reliable.

I hope that was sarcasm. JDpowers uses a scientific surveying and testing method, Consumer reports only surveys it readers. CR is anything but fair and honest with their opinions when it is put in their car reviews and then tries to back them up with a very unscientific survey from a base that only includes those whom buy their magazines.

That's not sarcasm. I'm only telling you what I've heard from upper-level management at a company that would be interested in JD Power results. The people I spoke with felt that Consumer Reports had far more reliable results than JD Power, and they were unhappy with the way JD Power conducts its operations. Before hearing that I had always thought JD Power to be a much better survey than Consumer Reports. But that's not what people in the know are saying.

Sounds like some people don't like the truth.
A survey has to fit a set of standards to be scientific and have its results stand up. The first rule is to have an open base of data. If your only sample is from a certain group, like people that buy your magazine, then the results are flawed before you even begin. CR is very biased and its "survey" is flawed. I knew this when I took my first statistics class. Hell it was one of the first things you learn.

 

[Sukhoi]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

JD Power is almost worthless. Their sample size is tiny, and manufacturers have very little success in trying to affect the results. Consumer Reports is much more reliable.

I hope that was sarcasm. JDpowers uses a scientific surveying and testing method, Consumer reports only surveys it readers. CR is anything but fair and honest with their opinions when it is put in their car reviews and then tries to back them up with a very unscientific survey from a base that only includes those whom buy their magazines.

That's not sarcasm. I'm only telling you what I've heard from upper-level management at a company that would be interested in JD Power results. The people I spoke with felt that Consumer Reports had far more reliable results than JD Power, and they were unhappy with the way JD Power conducts its operations. Before hearing that I had always thought JD Power to be a much better survey than Consumer Reports. But that's not what people in the know are saying.

Sounds like some people don't like the truth.
A survey has to fit a set of standards to be scientific and have its results stand up. The first rule is to have an open base of data. If your only sample is from a certain group, like people that buy your magazine, then the results are flawed before you even begin. CR is very biased and its "survey" is flawed. I knew this when I took my first statistics class. Hell it was one of the first things you learn.

Ok then lets agree both suck. JD Power sample size is far too small for the type of results they pull from it.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

JD Power is almost worthless. Their sample size is tiny, and manufacturers have very little success in trying to affect the results. Consumer Reports is much more reliable.

I hope that was sarcasm. JDpowers uses a scientific surveying and testing method, Consumer reports only surveys it readers. CR is anything but fair and honest with their opinions when it is put in their car reviews and then tries to back them up with a very unscientific survey from a base that only includes those whom buy their magazines.

That's not sarcasm. I'm only telling you what I've heard from upper-level management at a company that would be interested in JD Power results. The people I spoke with felt that Consumer Reports had far more reliable results than JD Power, and they were unhappy with the way JD Power conducts its operations. Before hearing that I had always thought JD Power to be a much better survey than Consumer Reports. But that's not what people in the know are saying.

Sounds like some people don't like the truth.
A survey has to fit a set of standards to be scientific and have its results stand up. The first rule is to have an open base of data. If your only sample is from a certain group, like people that buy your magazine, then the results are flawed before you even begin. CR is very biased and its "survey" is flawed. I knew this when I took my first statistics class. Hell it was one of the first things you learn.

Ok then lets agree both suck. JD Power sample size is far too small for the type of results they pull from it.

How big is their sample size?

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: NFS4
The best build Camrys were the '92-'96 models. It was all downhill after that. Toyota OVER-ENGINEERED those cars to by a fair margin and put a lot of money into development to insure that the materials used were up to snuff. Just look at the cheapness of the materials in the '97 in comparison to the '96 model.

QFT There were even articles at the time ('97) about how Toyota was rigorously "rationalizing" the manufacture of the then new Camrys to hold down production costs. It sure showed. I also agree with whoever said the '92-'96 models were the best looking, too . . . sinuous and yet substatial.

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
no, they all grow. old accords were the size of todays civics

Smaller, actually, I'm sure of it. My dad had a '78 Accord four door sedan, the first year for that model (all previous were hatchbacks), and I'm SURE that tiny little red rocket is/was smaller than the newest Civic sedans.

Christ, a female friend of mine bought a new Civic sedan hybrid. She came over at late at night to pick me up to go out (no pesky street lights where I live) and in the dark I thought the damn thing was an Accord. I'd bet any money that it is substantially biggger than my Dad's old Accord.

yeap. i had a 82 and 80 honda accord. it was pretty small. I had the hatchback (man i loved those) version and it was great.

I loved those cars. got great gas miliage and ran great.

 

[Cattlegod]

it is true. toyota is going in the crapper as far as quality is concerned.

 

[imthebadguy]

its a POS: GET A FORD =)