Why are Toyotas so reliable (and boring).

[Syndrome]

Easy answer. Having dealt directly with Toyota Australia when I worked for one of their Tier 1 suppliers I discovered three things. Firstly Toyota are not technology leaders - they fill their car with proven products. Secondly is they strongly resist change - if it isn't broke don't fix it (change it). Thirdly they do not accept the response "it is a one off failure" - they will hound you mercilessly on each and every quality issue.

As to why Toyota are boring is also easy to answer. Most people who own vehicles are not "car guys". To them a vehicle is something which helps you get from A to B. They want it to do it with as little fuss as possible. Toyota realise this and have built a successful business model catering to these types of people.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Syndrome

Easy answer. Having dealt directly with Toyota Australia when I worked for one of their Tier 1 suppliers I discovered three things.

Firstly Toyota are not technology leaders - they fill their car with proven products. Secondly is they strongly resist change - if it isn't broke don't fix it.
Thirdly they do not accept the response "it is a one off failure" - they will hound you mercilessly on each and every quality issue.

As to why Toyota are boring is also easy to answer. Most people who own vehicles are not "car guys". To them a vehicle is something which helps you get from A to B. They want it to do it with as little fuss as possible. Toyota realise this and have built a successful business model catering to these types of people.

Got it in one - I also had experience with Toyota, if your product is going to be on their platform then it better be good.

As to your last point - then everyone else like Honda tried to emulate then unsuccessfully and shot themselves in the foot.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by Syndrome

Easy answer. Having dealt directly with Toyota Australia when I worked for one of their Tier 1 suppliers I discovered three things. Firstly Toyota are not technology leaders - they fill their car with proven products. Secondly is they strongly resist change - if it isn't broke don't fix it (change it). Thirdly they do not accept the response "it is a one off failure" - they will hound you mercilessly on each and every quality issue.

As to why Toyota are boring is also easy to answer. Most people who own vehicles are not "car guys". To them a vehicle is something which helps you get from A to B. They want it to do it with as little fuss as possible. Toyota realise this and have built a successful business model catering to these types of people.

I am pretty sure back on page 1 or 2 I said Toyota are not innovators, and it is good to see we agree

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by Dr Terry

When they were first introduced a couple of years ago, they were a joke. They were slow, blew black smoke & fell over on corners.

First mod was to lower them, fit decent tyres & wheels & sort the suspension. But they were still slow & blew black smoke.

In the latest incarnation, they simply fitted an LS V8 & a decent transmission.

They can actually 'race' them now, but they still haven't approached the times set by the Holden/Ford utes.

Dr Terry

agree, but I thought Id just share that they are actually raced.

[Dr Terry]

Originally Posted by Vesper Martini

agree, but I thought Id just share that they are actually raced.

Yes, they were actually 'raced' , but they bore as much resemblance to a road going dual cab, as a V8 Supercar does to a stock street car.

In stock form a stock VF or FG is a much more driver & user friendly vehicle than any Thailand pick-up.

Dr Terry

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by GasoLane

Around here most seem to try though

Yes they must get about, on a weekly bases I'll usually see at least one in a ditch, or off the side of a mountain road, or on its side with a caravan semi-detacted from it or as Franco states facing the wrong direction on a roundabout.
Local towies love em.
Toyboater Hilux or otherwise.

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by Vesper Martini

agree, but I thought Id just share that they are actually raced.

Stock ?? like production car racing ?

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by roKWiz

Stock ?? like production car racing ?

closer than stock compared to the supercars which bare virtually no resemblance to what you can go out and purchase.,

But hey I was just responding to what you posted.

Originally Posted by roKWiz View Post
When I start seeing them at Bathurst, LeMans or tin top racing I might be convinced

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by Vesper Martini

closer than stock compared to the supercars which bare virtually no resemblance to what you can go out and purchase.,

But hey I was just responding to what you posted.

Originally Posted by roKWiz View Post
When I start seeing them at Bathurst, LeMans or tin top racing I might be convinced

Must have been exciting.

[aussiblue]

Toyota are probably more innovative in some ways than others and don't get sufficient recognition for it it. Seehttps://www.ukessays.com/essays/marketing/oppurtunities-innovation-and-entrepreneurial-behaviour-in-toyota-marketing-essay.php

From the above evidences and the information, no doubt Toyota Motor Corporation is one of the most innovative companies around the globe. The Toyota Production System has been imitated by many other car manufacturing companies but they are not able to beat TMC in the grounds of Quality and efficiency. Also, it is much closer to the customer views as it delivers exactly what they needed. The marketing strategy works well for TMC as it got healthy relationships with the different suppliers and the other companies around it. Even the company manufactures some of the cars which are eco-friendly like Prius, which does not emit the Carbon Monoxide contents into the environment. It is one of the kinds as it also reduces 30% of the power consumption while manufacturing.

Perhaps testing things thoroughly and making gradual changes rather than rushing to the market with adequately tested products like the Ford powershift transmission is an innovation in itself.

[Vesper Martini]

How about this for innovation - the car that urinates

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgIj2XTSBuQ

[Fast Eddie]

No idea. I'll go and ask the NRMA Patrol Man (at the broken down Corolla) over the road and ask him, hee hee.

[Dr Terry]

Originally Posted by aussiblue

Perhaps testing things thoroughly and making gradual changes rather than rushing to the market with adequately tested products like the Ford powershift transmission is an innovation in itself.

Probably the most accurate statement so far.

Dr Terry

[aussiblue]

Yes

Perhaps testing things thoroughly and making gradual changes rather than rushing to the market with adequately tested products like the Ford powershift transmission is an innovation in itself.

was meant to be:

Perhaps testing things thoroughly and making gradual changes rather than rushing to the market with inadequately tested products like the Ford powershift transmission is an innovation in itself.

[marty351]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Unless you are Indian - then it's a status symbol to other Indians having a new Toyota Camry.

That reminded me of an Indian friend from high school who would beat on about his parents Honda Civics, and that they were classed as "prestige" cars. Then I'd remind him that Honda also made lawnmowers.

[DRU842]

Silver Toyotas are popular with our road based account managers when reporting things to be avoided to improve safety.

[Sprintey]

Originally Posted by smoo

Yeah, when GM was developing their winner nearly every other brand was investing in diversifying their line up (BMW 1 series X1 X3 X6, Audi Q series Mazda CX etc).

Not knowing what we know now, I'm unsure the writing was on the wall in the 1990s. What were the early signs, Honda CRV and HRV, Toyota RAV4, LR Freelander, maybe Mercedes ML and A Class. Apart from them every thing was the same old of medium & large sedans/wagons, hatchbacks and agricultural Utes with vinyl floors, optional air con and wheezing engine (although the 79 series carries this long dropped norm into the second decade of the 21st century).
Who'd have thought in 1995 half of BMW, MB and Audis line up would consist of SUVs. Or that Jaguar, Bentley, Maserati, Lamborghini and Porsche will be selling hideous SUVs 20 years down the track

Looking at Commodore sales they really dropped off around 2003-2004. I'm guessing Holden was optimistic the VE was going to boost them back to what they were in the VT VX days.

Ford Australia must have seen it, for they designed and produced the Territory by 2004, almost to the exact month where SUV sales overtook sedan sales.

[Sprintey]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

Makes you wonder, if they killed Falcon at FG and spent everything on the Territory would it have been able to get the Lion V6 diesel and ZF 8speed within budget, Sync 3, lane keep assist, active cruise, AEB, rear ross traffic alert ..etc....which most Ford's get as standard now...instead of no local SUV and nothing in the same price bracket from all the imports in 2022. In fact find me a RWD biased car-like SUV of Terry size now that doesn't say BMW/MB/Jeep or even higher $$$.

This.

Recent Land Rover Discovery for that drivetrain - second handies <5yrs still about Terry Titanium pricing.
Jaguar F - Pace for the soul of the Terry (SUV that handles: it's AWD with 90/10 bias favouring the rear wheels).

New ones of both are fitted with Inline 6's, both petrol and diesel.

[fiestaz]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

Makes you wonder, if they killed Falcon at FG and spent everything on the Territory would it have been able to get the Lion V6 diesel and ZF 8speed within budget, Sync 3, lane keep assist, active cruise, AEB, rear ross traffic alert ..etc....which most Ford's get as standard now...instead of no local SUV and nothing in the same price bracket from all the imports in 2022. In fact find me a RWD biased car-like SUV of Terry size now that doesn't say BMW/MB/Jeep or even higher $$$.

Genesis also an option. Diesels, Petrol, all available... Still pricier than Territory... Although a lot is now.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by Sprintey

Ford Australia must have seen it, for they designed and produced the Territory by 2004, almost to the exact month where SUV sales overtook sedan sales.

Yet they still dumped $500 million into the BA.
If it was that obvious they’d have been better off kicking the can down the road with an AU facelift and put that money towards developing a smaller or more efficient version of the Territory or a proper 4wd with low range, solid rear axle and towing capability?
Easy to say in hindsight hey.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by smoo

Yet they still dumped $500 million into the BA.
If it was that obvious they’d have been better off kicking the can down the road with an AU facelift and put that money towards developing a smaller or more efficient version of the Territory or a proper 4wd with low range, solid rear axle and towing capability?
Easy to say in hindsight hey.

But the BA was a facelift of AU essentially. And the Territory didn't end up outselling falcon for what, nearly 10 years?

More of a question relating to FG than BA. But even at that stage the BF would have been outselling the Territory by what, at least 3 to 1?

[smoo]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

But the BA was a facelift of AU essentially. And the Territory didn't end up outselling falcon for what, nearly 10 years?

More of a question relating to FG than BA. But even at that stage the BF would have been outselling the Territory by what, at least 3 to 1?

I was thinking more like a VX-VY commodore or ED-EF Falcon facelift.
Where did the bulk of the BAs development money go, I assume developing the dohc engines would have sucked a lot of it up?

Territory sales were a bit lack lustre. I can’t remember if it outsold other comparable SUVs but it was a victim of being in a heavily diverse market with a total population smaller than many states in the USA.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by smoo

Yet they still dumped $500 million into the BA.
If it was that obvious they’d have been better off kicking the can down the road with an AU facelift and put that money towards developing a smaller or more efficient version of the Territory or a proper 4wd with low range, solid rear axle and towing capability?
Easy to say in hindsight hey.

As above the BA is a facelift of the AU have a look at the doors.. (with a new engine/trans)
There was already a smaller more efficient model called the Escape, and they did put money towards developing a proper 4WD its called Everest.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by smoo

I was thinking more like a VX-VY commodore or ED-EF Falcon facelift.
Where did the bulk of the BAs development money go, I assume developing the dohc engines would have sucked a lot of it up?

Territory sales were a bit lack lustre. I can’t remember if it outsold other comparable SUVs but it was a victim of being in a heavily diverse market with a total population smaller than many states in the USA.

I would compare the AU-BA like the VY-VZ but I agree agree where did the money go?? it would be interesting to see what Holden spent on that Transition.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by smoo

I was thinking more like a VX-VY commodore or ED-EF Falcon facelift.
Where did the bulk of the BAs development money go, I assume developing the dohc engines would have sucked a lot of it up?

Territory sales were a bit lack lustre. I can’t remember if it outsold other comparable SUVs but it was a victim of being in a heavily diverse market with a total population smaller than many states in the USA.

New engines across the range, new IRS, new interior, just about every new panel bar the doors. It was closer to an all new model than a facelift.

From what I can remember Territory was the highest selling SUV for years after release. But the market for SUV's was fairly small back then. Nowhere near what it is now.

There simply weren't that many crossover style SUV's on the market at that stage. You had the Kluger and a couple of others really. Most SUV's were still separate chassis off-roaders like Landcruiser, Patrol, Pathfinder, Pajero etc.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by Vesper Martini

As above the BA is a facelift of the AU have a look at the doors.. (with a new engine/trans)
There was already a smaller more efficient model called the Escape, and they did put money towards developing a proper 4WD its called Everest.

Yes I am aware of the AU-BA changes.
The Everest came around 15 years later. Talking about the turn of the century when Ford & Holden were pumping hundred of millions into their sedans while it was supposedly obvious no one wanted them (said after the demise of Falcon/Commodore 20 years later, not at the time when everyone was caught up in the sedan power wars and Ambrose/Skaife V8SC).
If that were the case Ford would have been better off spending BA R&D dollars into the Territory, or a smaller SUV platform running say frugal PSA diesels or developing modifying F150/F series for local market?
This was the time when the dual cabs were rough as guts. With no creature comforts, no auto trans options and around 80kw. I don't think anyone at the time (2002) predicated these things would be the best sellers within 15 years.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by smoo

Yes I am aware of the AU-BA changes.
The Everest came around 15 years later. Talking about the turn of the century when Ford & Holden were pumping hundred of millions into their sedans while it was supposedly obvious no one wanted them (said after the demise of Falcon/Commodore 20 years later, not at the time when everyone was caught up in the sedan power wars and Ambrose/Skaife V8SC).
If that were the case Ford would have been better off spending BA R&D dollars into the Territory, or a smaller SUV platform running say frugal PSA diesels or developing modifying F150/F series for local market?
This was the time when the dual cabs were rough as guts. With no creature comforts, no auto trans options and around 80kw. I don't think anyone at the time (2002) predicated these things would be the best sellers within 15 years.

The time frame you mention relates to the FG though, not the BA. And at that stage of early development, around 2003/4, the Falcon was still selling in high numbers. It took around 5 years to get it into production, so they can only base their future projections on what they are seeing at the time of the projects initial stages. The market didn't start to turn away from large sedans until 2006/7, when the FG program was in full swing and close to having the first prototypes built.

The Territory didn't outsell the Falcon till around 2012, and the plant closures were announced not long after.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

The time frame you mention relates to the FG though, not the BA. And at that stage of early development, around 2003/4, the Falcon was still selling in high numbers. It took around 5 years to get it into production, so they can only base their future projections on what they are seeing at the time of the projects initial stages. The market didn't start to turn away from large sedans until 2006/7, when the FG program was in full swing and close to having the first prototypes built.

The Territory didn't outsell the Falcon till around 2012, and the plant closures were announced not long after.

It would have been interesting what Territory sales would have been if diesel was offered from the start.
Edit, late 1990s - 2000 would have been when the B series was being developed right?

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by smoo

It would have been interesting what Territory sales would have been if diesel was offered from the start.

Maybe wouldn't have made that much of a difference initially, as petrol was still cheap, and broady was running at max capacity. Might have made a difference when it went over a dollar for the first time, and both Falcon and Territory sales started to dwindle when petrol prices started to climb around 2007/8.

That was the first real major thing that started costing FoA sales, when petrol started to get expensive. The first of many that lead to the downfall.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by smoo

It would have been interesting what Territory sales would have been if diesel was offered from the start.
Edit, late 1990s - 2000 would have been when the B series was being developed right?

You could argue that Falcons and commodores would have sold better with diesels.
I arrived in Australia in 2003 and I noticed the general Public didn't want to buy a diesel. ( there are still many thinking this way) I came from the UK where diesel was all the rage - all cars in Asia were popular in Diesel.

here - not so we a different market - finally getting a great diesel in Ranger/everest whilst other countries are stopping Diesel

The Territory was based off the 1st Gen X5 and built with Falcon technology, they did really well to make it so cheap

somebody had the Chrystal on that one, but its easy to pick out things they could have done in hindsight