Rusting spare tire cable? give me a break...........

Where did I "support" Toyota?

Its how you just kind of throw this whole thing up in the air as circumstantial and just people with wild imaginations. Its all just coincidence that all this is happening. Just look at your last few responses

Yeah, any SUV could roll over. CR just tested THIS SUV only inthis manner, and not the others.

How many companies hault the production of thier car for just no reason?


Yeah, thats it....

Why?

Agreed. There was a pickup recall done for a similar type of thing- happening to bed cables.

until that tire falls off the vehicle in front of you and bashes into your car. With any luck it doesn't come through your windshield.

Big truck tire...figure spare is at least a 17 inch steel wheel with a large 265/70-17 on it.
Just drops from under a truck at 70mph. Shesh, give Vitals a break.

Happened to a friend of mine once and I was in the passenger seat. Truck in front of us on the Parkway lost his spare tire @70mph. No way to avoid it and went right over it. Tore the oil pan apart, the trans tailshaft, broke the driveshaft, and destroyed the exhaust and rear suspension. It's a miracle we weren't killed.

I love how the fact that I do not bash toyota on this board equates to me being their fan. :lol:

I'm sorry if I don't take a magazine article and religiously follow it like it was written by some god. There have been dozens of articles posted here against GM and you run to defend them 9 out of 10 times. Yet, me not believing an article is somehow "bad". Funny how that works out.

For future references, just because I do not bash a product does not mean I like it; as already stated I do not like Toyota, and I would NOT buy any of their cars. It doesn't get much more clear cut than that. I can even go as far as to say that I would buy one GM car before I bought a Toyota/Lexus.

You know, if they tested only THIS SUV than it just becomes much more irrelevant. But thanks for trying.

Plus, their test did NOT show that the car even tips over, they simply said "COULD ROLL OVER". You know what? Mini Cooper "COULD ROLL OVER", and I have seen one on it's roof. Does that mean that every car is unsafe now? After all if you could roll a cooper you could pretty much roll any car......



What would be a better move, of you great PR person? Since we are on a subject of roll overs, can you name me a car that received WORSE roll over rating than a Ford Explorer, in early 2000's? I'll give you a hint, Ford got 2 starts and was sued for millions, this awesome product was ONE, ONE!!!, star and nothing was done about it, if I remember correctly. Is that the right move? Just continue producing junk?



It's a car, it will rust. I used to have a roommate who drove a SAAB; every time he would start that beast, or move from a stand still, he would leave a chunk of it behind. Where was the recall?

Not to disrupt a good pissin' match. But the fact that toyota is imploding makes me happy. For years I tried explaining to the un-informed that toyotas aren't made any better or more reliable nor do magic fairys sprinkle dust on each one.
Typical Japenese business philosophy, build it to only hold up to the average person under average conditions and nothing more.
When I worked for honda they were the same way. It was always the customers fault if there was a problem, never their over-rated product.

I don't think there's any reason for anything less than 10 years old to have an issue with rust. Import, domestic, or whatever. Even in the rust belt states. It's not like the 60's and 70's where galvanizing and rust proofing wasn't really done, and stainless steel wasn't used at all.

And FWIW, I said the same thing when GM recalled their trucks for frame rust issues. And when Toyota did the same.

I didnt say anything about following any article in a religious nature.
It has nothing to do with this specific article, but your general outlook on this whole situation.
Dozens of articles against GM? Show me them, and show me my defense of GM whole heartedly and as blind as you. Do I try to correct some misnomers in some articles, or come out against op-eds, then yes.
Your reaction to any of the articles posted ranged from laughing at the thought, to total dismissal?
I dont expect you to follow any brand, but your blindeness on this whole issue of Toyota making faulity product is hilarious. You shrug it off, but then pull out issues some 30+ years ago from GM, to say that they also made bad products. You dont have to bash it, but you dismissal of all the articles sure comes off as you defending them to boarderline apologetic for them.


First off, the line was a mention that the GX is an unsafe vehicle, and that it should be haulted. Im not saying it SHOULDNT have been, it was more sarcasim in your general attitude that this is just really a big joke.

A Ford Explorer was not from the 00's, but late 90's, over a decade ago, that had more to do with stupid drivers not checking tire pressures for low grade tires. The problem is that the Explorers were top heavy, and the A/B/C/D pillars were not strong enough to hold the car up.
But Ford fixed it, lowerd its center of gravity, and they dont flip over anymore. They also replaced millions of Firestone tires for free.

ohh look they're blaming it on the software!

Associated Press


WASHINGTON — Toyota says it will recall its 2010 Lexus GX 460 to address a potential problem with the SUV’s stability control system that targets possible rollovers.

The recall affects about 9,400 vehicles that have been sold since the SUV went on sale in late December. Consumer Reports issued a “Don’t Buy” warning last week on the 2010 GX 460, saying it was susceptible to rolling over.

Toyota says dealers will update software in the vehicle stability control system. Toyota already had halted sales of new GX 460s and begun tests on all of its SUVs.

The automaker also agreed to pay a record $16.4 million fine on Monday for failing to properly report a safety problem with defective gas pedals.

I really don't have the time to find your post nutswinging for GM, if you're in denial then so be it. I'd rather study for LSAT, at least I know that it will pay off in june.

By the way, I was talking about Blazer/Jimmy not the exploder, why don't you re-read my post, it received 1 star rollover rating in 2001. Did anyone stop production, nah, just continued to sell them and make money. I had a handy dandy link somewhere about how many people died as a result of a roll over in those cars, but I can't find it right now. But of course it won't be GMs fault anyway, so why bother.

Anyways, Toyota sucks, GM is great. Back to LSAT.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...stryCollection

Recalls 03 Sequoias

Do you think Toyota is going overboard to save face now with all of these "other" recalls or is the situation truly that bad?

IMO:

The cat is out of the bag with its tail on fire.

It almost seems that way

Eh, had there not been the big 8 million car, no-stopping deal..some of this stuff would have been like other Yoda recalls.

Finally, something that Al can prance around about! :lol:

wow possibility of paying $3,000,000,000 for 327 lawsuits...

that was a conservative estimate.

Maybe it will make thier "value" go down.