• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

doing research on Toyota vs European Cars

J

jingramm

Senior member
Anyone know what are the main key distinctions between a company like Toyota and makers of European cars like Saab or BMW for example? Could be any european brand you are familiar with

I'm talking about in terms of personnel, quality, satisfaction, etc. Not what is perceived by us, but what the company says they do and what the true results are.
 
Well the main difference I find between these two types of car manufacturers, are the parts they use to manufacturer their cars.

A Toyota would be manufactured with good quality 'affordable' parts that would cut the deal and allow the car to run, where as European cars manufacture their cars with more 'premium' parts, hence people find them more of a prestige status on the streets.

These two factors can be experienced when you are servicing your car for the first time, as a European car dealer would charge you a higher price compared to a Toyota company. Overall, it would cost more to run a European car than a car manufactured from Toyota for this reason.

That would most likely be the main difference between the two companies.
 
PC Geek said:
A Toyota would be manufactured with good quality 'affordable' parts that would cut the deal and allow the car to run, where as European cars manufacture their cars with more 'premium' parts, hence people find them more of a prestige status on the streets.
Click to expand...

This in spades. The battery that came with my Corolla is worse than the worst battery you can buy at Walmart. It works, but it's basically the bare minimum of what you could put in any car and have it still work. The same is true for both of my parents Nissan vehicles. The new battery I put in my Corolla has higher current output than the stock battery that came with their 4.0L Nissan Xterra.

Same goes for tires. The stock tires that came on my Honda Civic were extremely low budget tires. The performance was perfectly acceptable, but the tires were done after maybe 40,000 miles. Standard all season tires you get at Walmart or Costco are expected to last at least 80k, 90k, 100k miles. Stock tires on a BMW are often high performance tires in the ballpark of $200 each. OEM tires for an equivalent size Honda Accord are worth maybe $80 if you round up.
 
Another distinction I have seen from Asian/Domestic cars vs European cars is their OEM suspension tuning. Asian and American manufacturers favor comfort and road "isolation" while European favor handling and road "feel."
 
KIAman said:
Another distinction I have seen from Asian/Domestic cars vs European cars is their OEM suspension tuning. Asian and American manufacturers favor comfort and road "isolation" while European favor handling and road "feel."
Click to expand...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjzpx_jUUA0 😀


I'd say bumpy handling is a lot safer. Comfort makes it boring and too easy to fall asleep. Falling asleep while driving is actually quite common. jlee's probably had to write up a few of these.
 
Well, I am not sure about high quality parts as well. High price? Yes. High quality? IDK.

I mean, if you compare the least expensive Bimmer, 128i, @ $ 35k and the cheapo Corolla @ $ 17k, of course you should expect 128i to have high quality parts compare Corolla, and I am pretty sure it does.

But if you compare 128i to Lexus IS250, which is also about $ 35k, I am not sure the parts in 128i are high quality compare to the ones in IS.

And how about cheapo European vs expensive Toyata? Which one do you think have higher quality parts, $ 30k Avalon or $ 20k Jetta?

Now the question is cheapo European vs. cheapoo Toyota. That I don't know.
 
Last edited:
everydae said:
Well, I am not sure about high quality parts as well. High price? Yes. High quality? IDK.

I mean, if you compare the least expensive Bimmer, 128i, @ $ 35k and the cheapo Corolla @ $ 17k, of course you should expect 128i to have high quality parts compare Corolla, and I am pretty sure it does.

But if you compare 128i to Lexus IS250, which is also about $ 35k, I am not sure the parts in 128i are high quality compare to the ones in IS.

And how about cheapo European vs expensive Toyata? Which one do you think have higher quality parts, $ 30k Avalon or $ 20k Jetta?

Now the question is cheapo European vs. cheapoo Toyota. That I don't know.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup: Truth. There is very little difference here.
 
ShawnD1 said:
This in spades. The battery that came with my Corolla is worse than the worst battery you can buy at Walmart. It works, but it's basically the bare minimum of what you could put in any car and have it still work. The same is true for both of my parents Nissan vehicles. The new battery I put in my Corolla has higher current output than the stock battery that came with their 4.0L Nissan Xterra.

Same goes for tires. The stock tires that came on my Honda Civic were extremely low budget tires. The performance was perfectly acceptable, but the tires were done after maybe 40,000 miles. Standard all season tires you get at Walmart or Costco are expected to last at least 80k, 90k, 100k miles. Stock tires on a BMW are often high performance tires in the ballpark of $200 each. OEM tires for an equivalent size Honda Accord are worth maybe $80 if you round up.
Click to expand...

What more would you expect of it? Does your new battery suck your dick while you drive or something?

I honestly can't recall ever replacing the battery in my Maxima and it is 8 years old with 96,000 miles on it. Never once have I had any trouble with the battery and I have an after market HU and amp/sub in this car too.
 
Japanese vehicles are clearly more reliable than European.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...reliability-findings/reliability-findings.htm

Asia still dominates

Despite recent safety recalls, Toyota models, including those from Scion and Lexus, remained among the most reliable and earned top scores in five vehicle categories. Only the all-wheel-drive Lexus GS and the new Lexus IS 250 convertible are below average. The redesigned 2010 Toyota Prius, hurt by antilock brake problems on early vehicles, scored only average. That is quite a drop from previous years. (We've reinstated our recommendations for eight Toyota models that had problems with sticking accelerator pedals.)
Honda and Acura are among the top four brands, with their models topping five vehicle categories. But problems with rear brake pads help drop the 4-cylinder Accord and Acura TSX to average.
Hyundai and Kia continued to do well, with only one model, the Kia Sedona minivan, rated below average. All six new models for 2010 had average or better reliability, an impressive first-year showing.
Nissan's mainstream models did fine. But the small Nissan Cube had a below average score in its first appearance in our survey. The Infiniti models were all average or better.
Subaru had a good record overall, with a top rating going to the four-cylinder Legacy sedan and the non-turbo version of the Forester SUV. The WRX was the only model that rated below average.
cars_reliability_audi_a6.jpg


Below average reliability: Audi A6




Europe's bumpy road

BMW had a bad year, with five of 11 models now scoring below average. Although the BMW M3 topped the sporty cars category, the 1, 3, and 5 Series models with the 3.0-liter, turbocharged engine had high problem rates related to the fuel system, among other issues.
Mercedes-Benz had the least reliable vehicles in three categories. Six of its 13 models were below average, and the GLK SUV was far below average this year. The redesigned E350 sedan was above average, but the new E-Class coupe, a wholly different car, was a disappointment.
Almost three-quarters of the Audi models we analyzed were below average. Volkswagen did better, with its Golf (formerly Rabbit) doing very well and the various Jetta models doing average or better.
Click to expand...
 
JulesMaximus said:
What more would you expect of it? Does your new battery suck your dick while you drive or something?
Click to expand...
Ampacity drops dramatically as the temperature gets lower. It's not uncommon for the cold cranking amp value to be less than half of the battery's ideal output at a nice warm temperature.

The battery in my parents Altima is so shitty that the car won't start if you let it sit for a couple days. It's just barely enough battery to get the car started and that's only if you run the car every single day. Tolerances that narrow are unacceptable. I think one should be able to let a car sit for a whole month and the thing should fire up on the first try.
The battery in their Xterra was so weak that even after fully charging it with a trickle charger it just wasn't strong enough to crank the engine over when it's -30C (-20F).

This is how Nissan operates. Figure out what the minimum spec is to have it work then make it slightly cheaper so it no longer works. There is absolutely no excuse for putting a 650A battery in a vehicle that has a 4L engine.


Throckmorton, quality of parts and quality of engineering are two different things. I've made at least 900 threads about how much I hate my Corolla due to cheap parts and cut corners, but it's still a well engineered vehicle. The differential sucks because it's cheap, but the thing works. The battery was pitifully weak, but the electrical system itself works fine. People don't like the steering very much, but the steering still works. My friend says the brakes feel "mushy" but they still bring the car to a stop every time. Cheap parts and good engineering are still better than good parts with bad engineering. You can use any high quality parts you want, but the thing will still suck if you put them together the wrong way.
 
Last edited:
ShawnD1 said:
Throckmorton, quality of parts and quality of engineering are two different things. I've made at least 900 threads about how much I hate my Corolla due to cheap parts and cut corners, but it's still a well engineered vehicle. The differential sucks because it's cheap, but the thing works. The battery was pitifully weak, but the electrical system itself works fine. People don't like the steering very much, but the steering still works. My friend says the brakes feel "mushy" but they still bring the car to a stop every time. Cheap parts and good engineering are still better than good parts with bad engineering. You can use any high quality parts you want, but the thing will still suck if you put them together the wrong way.
Click to expand...

Well what do you expect from a cheap economy car like the Corolla?

BTW-I know plenty of people who've owned those cars and never said a single bad thing about them. They really are great at what they are designed for, and that is a cheap, comfortable, reliable commuter car that doesn't cost much to operate.
 
"German Engineering" means it's needlessly complicated. Doesn't matter if it's a car, a medical device, a phone system or a freaking coffee maker. It's like a genius that's tripping on acid designed it. Too many sensors, parts, pieces, ect.

Toyota and Honda take a much more conservative approach and aren't as drunk on tech as ze Germans. Although the latest stuff from their Luxury lines continue to blur that line.
 
JulesMaximus said:
Well what do you expect from a cheap economy car like the Corolla?
Click to expand...
I expect it to be as good as a Honda. My Civic was a pretty damn good car and it felt really tight, but I couldn't afford one this time around. I wanted a car with traction control and stability control, and I couldn't get that unless I top the top end model which had expensive leather seats. Toyota has traction and stability on all Corollas. I've said numerous times that traction control is extremely annoying, but it really has helped me get out of a few ruts.


BTW-I know plenty of people who've owned those cars and never said a single bad thing about them. They really are great at what they are designed for, and that is a cheap, comfortable, reliable commuter car that doesn't cost much to operate.
Click to expand...
That's exactly why I got it. It's well engineered vehicle where all of the cheap parts seem to match correctly. By that I mean the weak transmission won't break because it's correctly tied to a weak engine. A car with better but incorrectly matched parts could be a lot less reliable, such as increasing the engine power by 50HP but not strengthening any other part of the drive train.



So my question is has the "average" changed? Did some cars actually get worse over the past year, or did the average get better?
Click to expand...
There are always some cars that get worse. It's not unusual to see a line of cars work fine for a number of years then out of nowhere come a bunch of transmission problems for a few years. Honda automatic transmissions ftl.
 
One example: Bose radios in a lot of Japanese cars (of course some Euro too) vs Harmon Kardon in some European cars.

I had one problem in my Japanese car in 39 months where they had to take it in (DVD player broke). I've had 7 major problems in my current European car where I lost it for days while they fixed it.
 
ShawnD1 said:
Same goes for tires.
Click to expand...

True. Friend of mine got done for, for four grand on a set of tires during one of his dealer services on his BMW! 😱

Why? It's because they had 'special' sensors in them that tell you when they are deflated.
 
Last edited:
PC Geek said:
True. Friend of mine got done for, for four grand on a set of tires during one of his dealer services on his BMW! 😱

Why? It's because they had 'special' sensors in them that tell you when they are deflated.
Click to expand...

that's called TPMS, and it's been mandated on cars since 2007 or 2008.


btw, $4k for a set of tires is a ripoff (unless he also happened to buy a set of hopefully forged wheels along with said tires). your friend is an idiot. even a set of michelin pilot sport PS2's (utlra high performance tire) is only about 1400. another 100 for mounting/balancing and you're good to go.

a set of TPMS sensors would run about $300.
 
Doggiedog said:
One example: Bose radios in a lot of Japanese cars (of course some Euro too) vs Harmon Kardon in some European cars.
Click to expand...

Factory audio in general is a joke, regardless of the name they pay to slap on it, some being more gimmicky than others. Cars just do not make good environments for audio anyway, so its not too surprising, but its the same thing as the Bose, you're paying for a name more than anything.
 
PC Geek said:
True. Friend of mine got done for, for four grand on a set of tires during one of his dealer services on his BMW! 😱

Why? It's because they had 'special' sensors in them that tell you when they are deflated.
Click to expand...

As fenix said, thats TPMS which is now mandatory. And it shouldnt cost anything addition when changing tires out. I had a local shop mount tires for me and the TPMS is permanently attached to the wheel so they pretty much just ignore that its even there
 
everydae said:
Well, I am not sure about high quality parts as well. High price? Yes. High quality? IDK.

I mean, if you compare the least expensive Bimmer, 128i, @ $ 35k and the cheapo Corolla @ $ 17k, of course you should expect 128i to have high quality parts compare Corolla, and I am pretty sure it does.

But if you compare 128i to Lexus IS250, which is also about $ 35k, I am not sure the parts in 128i are high quality compare to the ones in IS.

And how about cheapo European vs expensive Toyata? Which one do you think have higher quality parts, $ 30k Avalon or $ 20k Jetta?

Now the question is cheapo European vs. cheapoo Toyota. That I don't know.
Click to expand...

The common parts in the BMW line will trancend from 1 thru to 7. So what's good for the 7 is good for the 1.
 
darkswordsman17 said:
Factory audio in general is a joke, regardless of the name they pay to slap on it, some being more gimmicky than others. Cars just do not make good environments for audio anyway, so its not too surprising, but its the same thing as the Bose, you're paying for a name more than anything.
Click to expand...

It is but when I went to replace the "premium" Bose speakers in my MDX, I couldn't believe how cheap they were. They were made out of paper! Someone did a cost analysis of those speakers and it came out to about $10 in parts. I put in Infiinitys and even my non-techie, non-audiophile wife (ex), could hear the difference in improvement.
 
Doggiedog said:
It is but when I went to replace the "premium" Bose speakers in my MDX, I couldn't believe how cheap they were. They were made out of paper! Someone did a cost analysis of those speakers and it came out to about $10 in parts. I put in Infiinitys and even my non-techie, non-audiophile wife (ex), could hear the difference in improvement.
Click to expand...

Nearly all stock car speakers have a paper cone. And Bose is crap. I'm glad my car didn't come with their shit sound system.
 
Doggiedog said:
It is but when I went to replace the "premium" Bose speakers in my MDX, I couldn't believe how cheap they were. They were made out of paper! Someone did a cost analysis of those speakers and it came out to about $10 in parts. I put in Infiinitys and even my non-techie, non-audiophile wife (ex), could hear the difference in improvement.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess it's no wonder that they threw Bose away and chose ELS (Panasonic) as new partner, and won the first place in high-end stock stereo system review by Edmunds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top