[pjchappy]

It does get good gas mileage Paul....

"The new Porsche 911 Turbo S - 530hp, 7-speed paddle-shift gearbox, 0-100kmh in 3.3 seconds, and still manages 24.8mpg"

It truly is amazing the power and efficiency they can get out of that engine!  A 3.8 liter flat 6!   

Now, back to the topic at hand regarding Toyota's brake issue.  For true safety, I would need to have my Porsche with the PCCB option (ceramic brakes).  Please take that into consideration as you make your donation. 

Paul

[lonewolfny42]

Please take that into consideration as you make your donation.

This should cover it....use the extra for gas...$$$$$$$.....

[pjchappy]

This should cover it....use the extra for gas...$$$$$$$.....

Wow!  Thank you!!!! 




 

[srb]

For true safety, I would need to have my Porsche with the PCCB option (ceramic brakes).  Please take that into consideration as you make your donation.

It sounds like the Porsche is an economy car.  Hopefully it's brake pad and rotor replacements will be a lot cheaper than the Ferarri Enzo, with it's $6000 carbon-ceramic brake pads and $24,000 carbon-ceramic rotors (per axle).
 
It also probably doesn't require as expensive an oil change compared to the Enzo's V-12 which requires 12.2 quarts of special Shell Helix 10W-60 synthetic oil @ $60 per quart for $732 per oil change (which is required by the factory to maintain the warranty).
 
 
Now, back to the topic at hand regarding Toyota's brake issue.
 
Since the most recent Toyota recall, many analysts are calling for Toyota and others to add “smart brake” technology that would allow depressing the brake pedal to override the throttle control, thus canceling any acceleration, intended or otherwise.
 
Most European and luxury automakers and Nissan already use smart brake technology, but Ford, GM, Chrysler, Honda and Toyota do not.

Steve

[ooheadsoo]

Hm, say goodbye to heel-toe shifting?

Oh, to add my $0.02, I had an incident years ago where my brakes on a Mercury Sable failed and I was barely able to retain control after fishtailing wildly by using the (floor pedal) operated e-brake.  I managed to get home only by driving very slowly and applying e-brake very gently.  Ford couldn't find anything wrong with the brakes, said they worked great!  They put up a fight over giving us some remanufactured brake pads that probably cost them all of $5 a pad.  I don't know what the problem was or what caused the problem, and looking back, it probably wasn't the brake pads, but my brothers and I could have died.  Strangely, we still have the car and the brakes haven't failed since, but it has cost well over a grand in random nickel and dime repairs.  Luckily I didn't pay for those repairs, because if it were up to me, that car would be outta here.  Mysterious failure difficult to reproduce...sounds familiar.  The brake fluid probably boiled, now that I think of it, but I can't explain why it would have happened.

[ctviggen]

Now, back to the topic at hand regarding Toyota's brake issue.
 
Since the most recent Toyota recall, many analysts are calling for Toyota and others to add “smart brake” technology that would allow depressing the brake pedal to override the throttle control, thus canceling any acceleration, intended or otherwise.
 
Most European and luxury automakers and Nissan already use smart brake technology, but Ford, GM, Chrysler, Honda and Toyota do not.

Steve

Hopefully they won't install those on manual transmission cars (no more hitting the brakes while shifting and revving the engine to match rpms, when going around a corner -- the so called heel/toe shifting).  Otherwise, I think this is a good idea. 

This is why I like European cars -- they always seem to be ahead of others.  Saab invented heated seats, used turbos extensively (finally be used now on more cars because of gas mileage), had anti-submarining seats and anti-whiplash seats, front seats with airbags, automatic climate control, etc., usually well before the Japanese manufacturers.  Plus, the Japanese don't seem to do a great job with some of these. For instance, I rarely touch the automatic climate control in my Saab.  Meanwhile, the automatic climate control in my wife's Subaru is unusable.  It keeps blasting hot or cold air until one of us turns it to manual and turns down the fan.  My Saab is a 2001; her car is 2007 I believe. 

On the other hand, European cars tend to be way more expensive than the equivalent Japanese cars. 

[jackman]

Uh oh...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100210/ap_on_bi_ge/us_toyota_consumer_survey

[lonewolfny42]

Interesting video....discussing whether today's cars are over-engineered...

http://myprops.org/content/Video-Cars-Over-Engineered/

[launche]

How much has their stock dropped?

So where are the deals for the consumer since things are so bad for Toyota.

[cujobob]

The truth hurts my friend.  Read the attached articles and tell me which one is false?  8.5 million cars recalled and counting.  The guys with the close financial connection to Toyota investigating things and a media bought and paid for by Toyota's advertising dollars entrusted to report the "facts".

How many people have to die or become injured before this is big enough for you to care?  Maybe that's a better question.

Until we know just how common this problem is, it's unfair to say how bad the problems are.  The number of vehicles recalled has to do with that particular 'faulty' system used in a number of vehicles.  If the problem is extremely rare, it's much less an issue than the numbers (of recalls) show.  It's an inconvenience with a very tiny risk of danger.  Let's not overstate things and blow it out of proportion.  If it's a major risk, then it's a major risk and I'll acknowledge it as such.  Has this been shown yet?

You're making a personal attack implying that I'm heartless. You sure seem impartial...

[jackman]

Until we know just how common this problem is, it's unfair to say how bad the problems are.  The number of vehicles recalled has to do with that particular 'faulty' system used in a number of vehicles.  If the problem is extremely rare, it's much less an issue than the numbers (of recalls) show.  It's an inconvenience with a very tiny risk of danger.  Let's not overstate things and blow it out of proportion.  If it's a major risk, then it's a major risk and I'll acknowledge it as such.  Has this been shown yet?

You're making a personal attack implying that I'm heartless. You sure seem impartial...

You are making a personal attack by accusing me of attacking you.  I am at least as impartial as you.   

[pjchappy]

   This thread is taking a turn for the worse. 

[jackman]

  This thread is taking a turn for the worse.

Hey, no way that guy was serious about a "personal" attack.  My response was just a joke.  It looks like the people who started this thread were not looking for a counter opinion.  I was merely trying to provide some much needed balance.   

Cheers,

J

[cujobob]

Counter opinions are a good thing...so long as everyone understands what the reality of the situation is.

[drphoto]

Quality issues seems to even be hitting other noted for quality. I've been looking for a 2001-2004 Volvo V70 wagon. (prefer the V50, but they're too new and out of budget) but it turns out the V70's have a record of serious transmission problems.

Maybe modern cars have just gotten too complex for their own good.

[macrojack]

Agree with drphoto that modern cars are too much sizzle and not enough steak. Too much goes into marketing and gimickry and too little into the product itself. This is the fault of us, the consumers. In looking for more for our money, we have purchased "extras" without holding out for basic good construction. It seems to happen in audio as well. This site is a group of people who seem to look past audio gimmicks pretty well but there can be no denying that cosmetics and features dominate decisions at times.

My friends have told me for years that they accept the extra cost of a new car because of the peace of mind and freedom from repair issues that come with a new purchase. That argument appears to be getting very weak these days.

[TheChairGuy]

We get vehicles loaded with many more features than we did 30 years ago....with hugely better reliability than 3 decades ago, as well. One need only turn to Consumers Reports for this.

As for pricing, yes it has gone up...but so too have wages.  In fact it takes the about the same % of the average income today to purchase a car in the US as it did in 1979:



So its not sizzle being sold, its progress.  If there are gimmicky features offered that consumers don't want, they are dropped.  The 'system' works quite well, overall.

This Toyota recall, or that of Honda's recently publicized one regarding air bags, is merely a blip in a 40 year march by various Japanese makers in creating a much better car overall....and forcing makers from Europe and the US (and now S. Korea) to up the anti and offer even better vehicles.

John

[ctviggen]

I think the affordability index is total BS.  Right now, I'm looking for a car, and I'll be paying a little less than $500/month for SIX YEARS.  That's for a Jetta Sportwagen TDI, cost around 27,000 (no money down; no trade in).  When I bought my 1987 Jeep truck, it cost $11,087.  I put 6k down on that vehicle and paid I think around $300/month for two years.  Even if I financed the entire vehicle price, I could easily have paid $500/month for three years.

It took me SEVEN YEARS to pay off my 2001 9-3 Snaab Viggen (around 38k). 

I see these statistics saying cars are cheaper, but the cars seem incredibly expensive to me and the payment periods are very long relative to what they used to be.  Perhaps they mean because we're taking 6, 7, 8 years to pay for a car, that means the cost per year (given inflation, increased wages) is lower now, but I find the overall cost is higher.

[TheChairGuy]

Bob,

Its not BS...it is what it is.

You bought a Jeep 23 years ago...which one, the Wrangler?  I've been in many of those - 5 speed and completely spartan save the removeable top.  It's also one of the least safe vehicles made in the past 50 years - quite prone to rollovers and because it is classified as a light truck, it has few of the safety features of cars in the US.

Now, you are comparing it to a brand new VW Sportwagon TDI (an inspired choice, btw ) It is one of the safest compact cars on the road, with weight and space gobs larger than the Jeep, air bags, fancy DSG transmission, traction/stability control, 17" fancy wheels, and among the most advanced 4 cylinder engines on the planet - a turbodiesel that gets high-40's mpg on the highway.  Traveling in style, too 

Your SAAB Viggen was the highest performance model that SAAB made at the time....the top of the SAAB 9-3 range.  It was a specialized vehicle with small volumes and special parts so it cost a lot more for that specialization.

It took me 4 years to pay off my basic 1999 SAAB 9-3...4 years of lease at $300 monthly (nothing down) and a one time payment at lease end of $12K to purchase it.  List price was $27K on it....and my total payments over 4 years was less than the list price.  Neat trick! - but, that was because I choose a lesser model in SAAB's line (I salivated over the Viggen in 1999 but judged it unaffordable for me at the time) and the underlying lease had a 0.9% financing rate under it.

Back to your story - in the end, 23 years later, you are getting MUCH better vehicles than previously - and you likely make much more than you did as a freshly minted lawyer in 1987, too.

The only thing that has changed in many instances is one's appetite for risk. In your case, you paid down 55% of your vehicle in 1987 and you now are paying down 0%.  Otherwise, you're getting a great car for a lot less in inflation adjusted terms today.

John

[macrojack]

No need to worry about recalls with a SAAB.