DaewooOfDeath wrote:
In reply to mad_machine:
Build good cars for a few decades, get complacent, engage in shameless profit taking for a few decades, get bailed out, rinse, wash, repeat. GM did it, Ford did it, Chrysler did it, Toyota did it, Honda did it, all those companies that ended up being British Leyland did it, hell, even Ferrari did it.
Hyundai/Kia is going to do the same thing in 20 years.
Funny.. I don't remember making a political statement... I was more referring to the "numb" and effortless feel that many GM cars had for the past couple of decades. Toyota was not the first to make the car into an appliance
If they must put e-throttle on cars that don't need it (which is everything that doesn't have a robotized manual) they can at least do it right. It's not hard. You get a percentage value of throttle travel and make the throttle servo move that same percentage. Not complicated.
I was told my Fiesta has to learn my driving style
Even the transmission shifting.
Maybe so, since I have taught it well.
My fiance just got back from a road trip in a rented Camry, and she said it was horrible. She doesn't like driving, but really hated driving the Camry because of the throttle response. She actually called me from the road and asked me "Is there something wrong with this car? When I try to pass someone, I push the gas pedal and it takes like 5 seconds to go anywhere."
GameboyRMH wrote:
If they must put e-throttle on cars that don't need it (which is everything that doesn't have a robotized manual) they can at least do it right. It's not hard. You get a percentage value of throttle travel and make the throttle servo move that same percentage. Not complicated.
it's very hard.. the computer has to read your input, decide if you really wanted to accelerate or were just adjusting you foot, then it needs to decide if you really wanted that much throttle opening or if you wanted just a little, then it needs to decide if the engine can take that much throttle opening without lugging, and then it needs to check to make sure that the emissions will not be too high to go to WOT at this point in the rev range, then it needs to figure out why you just floored the throttle to avoid being run over by an 18 wheeler that was originally a mile down the road when you started to pull out
In reply to 16vCorey:
the masses must crave that E36 M3 cuz they keep buyin' it
16vCorey wrote:
My fiance just got back from a road trip in a rented Camry, and she said it was horrible. She doesn't like driving, but really hated driving the Camry because of the throttle response. She actually called me from the road and asked me "Is there something wrong with this car? When I try to pass someone, I push the gas pedal and it takes like 5 seconds to go anywhere."
I have the same feeling about my wife's Solara. We test drove an older version with more miles that drove just fine. Wife's drives like its towing a boat anchor.
mad_machine wrote:
DaewooOfDeath wrote:
In reply to mad_machine:
Build good cars for a few decades, get complacent, engage in shameless profit taking for a few decades, get bailed out, rinse, wash, repeat. GM did it, Ford did it, Chrysler did it, Toyota did it, Honda did it, all those companies that ended up being British Leyland did it, hell, even Ferrari did it.
Hyundai/Kia is going to do the same thing in 20 years.
Funny.. I don't remember making a political statement... I was more referring to the "numb" and effortless feel that many GM cars had for the past couple of decades. Toyota was not the first to make the car into an appliance
I don't remember making a political statement, either. More like economics. Rational irrationality, to be precise.
Car makers tend to go in cycles because of the underlying logic of that cycle. If you are a stake holder in Toyota you are going to have different goals at different stages of your company's evolution.
When you first break into the market you are going to focus on innovative cars and high quality because you need to build a customer base. You will also tolerate some pretty low margins. I guarantee you that 80s/90s Toyota, back when they were making the most reliable cars in the world for cut rate prices, had absolutely tiny margins compared to GM which was selling crappy cars for more.
After you've built up your customer base you are going to dial back on the R&D, fatten your margins and cash in on your reputation. This is really the only time you are going to make a lot of money. To keep the Toyota metaphor going, this is the time to ax the Supra, Celica and MR2 in favor of Sequoias and Tundras. You are still making good cars, but they are no longer innovative and they no longer have that sparkle that comes from running a racing version of every compact you build. They do, however, have really fat margins. The downside is you sort of forget how to make cutting edge cars during phase 2, which brings us to the third stage.
At this point your company is completely run by the accounting department. You can no longer lead the market and you don't have enough talent to make anything worthwhile. This is GM circa 2004. You are banking completely on reputation and inertia. You are headed for a major shakeup, a bailout or extinction.
And it makes sense. You can't have stage two, which is the most important for a business, without also having stage 1 and stage 3.
Toyota is in late stage 2, Hyundai/Kia is in stage 1, Honda is in the middle of stage 2, Ford is in stage 1, Chrysler was in deep stage 3 just a couple years ago.
Not to bring up the dead but a co-worker with a 2011 Rav4 has reported unintended acceleration 5 times to Toyota.
As of last month they finally agreed to buy it back.
z31maniac wrote:
How does a car with that little power exhibit torque steer?
The old Daewoo I had with 2-digit horsepower would rip the wheel out of your hands.
Flight Service wrote:
Not to bring up the dead but a co-worker with a 2011 Rav4 has reported unintended acceleration 5 times to Toyota.
As of last month they finally agreed to buy it back.
Scared me there for a little. That a canoe salesman dug up the thread.
Whew- a real person.
There seems to be a convincing argument that Toyota might have a problem but I always feel that rental cars and vehicles owned by private parties should never be compared. I have been in peoples personal cars which are very nice and in the exact same vehicle that is rented and they are a piece of junk. Rental cars live their life at the extreme end of abuse and therefore are more prone to weird problems.
Not sure if I made a point here.
RossD wrote:
I had a Chevy Aveo last year as a rental car. I got it with 5 miles on it. The throttle response was terrible, but by the time we put 1000 miles on it, it acted more 'normal'. No huge pauses between when I put my foot down and when the engine would start spinning faster. It was actually scary the first time I tried to pull out with some sort of vigor, the car rolled into the closest lane of traffic and we had to wait for the engine to decide to play along. My buddy started yelling at me to keep driving! I yelled back "I'm trying!"
I would have turned around and returned it. There is no way a car should do that new or otherwise. The manufacturers should "train" them before they leave the factory.
In reply to dean1484:
I actually rented a new Sonic several months back, and I had the complete OPPOSITE experience with it. It was a really nice car, had enough power, handled pretty well, and was comfortable. I thought it was actually a bit better than my Fiesta, and that is a good car.
alfadriver wrote:
Scared me there for a little. That a canoe salesman dug up the thread.
Whew- a real person.
No, no, real person here. Just thought I would add to the GRM archives for safe keeping.
Private individual, leased 2011 Rav4. 5 acceleration issues to date. Toyota agreed to buy it back in August 2012. Co-Workers POV.
The reason he brought it up is that I recently bought a Rav4 ('03 model) and he was concerned for my wife and kids safety.
When looking for your next car please shop GRM Autos of Holy Hill, FL. Where every car is put back together by hand for you. Literally
