Prev: More money for the dealer on Toytoa sales
Next: Toyota makes great cars, they are just overpriced
From: jim beam on 15 Feb 2010 16:13
On 02/15/2010 12:49 PM, C. E. White wrote:
> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:hYGdncTgf6GiPeTWnZ2dnUVZ_v8AAAAA(a)speakeasy.net...
>
>> how many old people are there on the road? and why aren't we
>> hearing this about buick's. even when old folk plow into crowded
>> markets killing the crowd?
>
> I read articles about old folks crashing all sort of cars becasue they
> screwed up. Maybe you don't hear about an investigation of Buicks
> crashing into things becasue there aren't that many cases related to a
> single year/model. Just for grins, I did the following comparison
> based onthe NHTSA Database:
>
> 2007 Toyota Camry (not Solara, not Hybrid):
> Component VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL: 146 Complaints,

and not a single complaint is from a politically motivated shill! never
ever!


> 1 death, 16 injuries
> Componet: VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL : 2 Compliants, 0
> deaths, 4 injuries
>
> 2007 Buick LACROSSE - 0 Vehicle Speed Control Complaints......
>
> 2007 Buick LUCERNE
> Componet: VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL: 3 Complaints, 1 injury
>
> So what would you concentrate your investigation on? The vehcile with
> 171 complaints, 1 death, and 20 injuries related to unintneded
> acceleration, or the vehciles with 3 complaints, no deaths and one
> injuries (at least as reported to NHTSA).
>
> Ed
> Component:
>
>

er, what are the sales volumes of the camry vs. lacrosse? camry vs.
lucerne?

--
nomina rutrum rutrum
From: C. E. White on 15 Feb 2010 16:34

"jim beam" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
news:Sr2dnYxnz7F8JeTWnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net...
> On 02/15/2010 12:49 PM, C. E. White wrote:
>> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:hYGdncTgf6GiPeTWnZ2dnUVZ_v8AAAAA(a)speakeasy.net...
>>
>>> how many old people are there on the road? and why aren't we
>>> hearing this about buick's. even when old folk plow into crowded
>>> markets killing the crowd?
>>
>> I read articles about old folks crashing all sort of cars becasue
>> they
>> screwed up. Maybe you don't hear about an investigation of Buicks
>> crashing into things becasue there aren't that many cases related
>> to a
>> single year/model. Just for grins, I did the following comparison
>> based onthe NHTSA Database:
>>
>> 2007 Toyota Camry (not Solara, not Hybrid):
>> Component VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL: 146 Complaints,
>
> and not a single complaint is from a politically motivated shill!
> never ever!
>
>
>> 1 death, 16 injuries
>> Componet: VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL : 2
>> Compliants, 0
>> deaths, 4 injuries
>>
>> 2007 Buick LACROSSE - 0 Vehicle Speed Control Complaints......
>>
>> 2007 Buick LUCERNE
>> Componet: VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL: 3 Complaints, 1 injury
>>
>> So what would you concentrate your investigation on? The vehcile
>> with
>> 171 complaints, 1 death, and 20 injuries related to unintneded
>> acceleration, or the vehciles with 3 complaints, no deaths and one
>> injuries (at least as reported to NHTSA).
>>
>> Ed
>> Component:
>>
>>
>
> er, what are the sales volumes of the camry vs. lacrosse? camry vs.
> lucerne?

I am sure the Camry outsell both Buick models combined greatly. But
even if it is 10 to one, then the comparison is 15 to 3. I also looked
at 2007 Malibus (a GM vehicle with sales at least 60% of the Camry) -
it had 2 vehicle speed control complaints. Most of the Carry
complaints date back to before 2008 (~100 before 2008, most of the
rest from 2008/early 2009, with a few from 2010).....so Toyota had
plenty of warning that there was a problem.

You seem to want to categorize anyone complaining about a Toyota as
shill. So how do you categorize yourself when you keep crapping on
Ford and GM. I think if you would actually read the NHTSA documents
available that relate to some of the biggest recalls instituted by
those companies you would see they were far more co-operative than
Toyota. You particularly seem to want to compare the current Toyota
fiasco with the Explorer Firestone Tire issue. No matter what you may
think, Ford handled that far better than Toyota has handled their
current problems. The biggest issue in the Ford Explorer recall was
assigning blame. It was pretty clear that the problem was the tires,
and it was also clear Bridgestone was trying to weasel out of
admitting blame. While waiting for Bridgestoen to come clean (they
eventually had to), Ford replaced millions of tires at their expense.
Furthermore, if you check the Insurance Industry Statics for Explorers
of that vintage, you'll discover that Explorers had one of the best
safety records for mid-sized SUVs (far better than for 4Runners or
Pathfinders). See
http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/ictl_pdf/ictl_0900.pdf . Notice that
the injury loss rating for 1997-1999 4 Door Ford Explorers was 68. The
rating for 4 door 4Runners was 98 (100 is average for all vehicles,
lower is better). So while you may try to smear Ford , the fact is
Ford handled the Exporer tire problem decently. I'll agee they
deserve some blame for installing second rate tires on Explorers in
the first place, but they did their best to fix the problem as quickly
as possible when Bridgestone tried to cut and run.

Ed


From: jim beam on 15 Feb 2010 17:47
On 02/15/2010 01:34 PM, C. E. White wrote:
> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:Sr2dnYxnz7F8JeTWnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net...
>> On 02/15/2010 12:49 PM, C. E. White wrote:
>>> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
>>> news:hYGdncTgf6GiPeTWnZ2dnUVZ_v8AAAAA(a)speakeasy.net...
>>>
>>>> how many old people are there on the road? and why aren't we
>>>> hearing this about buick's. even when old folk plow into crowded
>>>> markets killing the crowd?
>>>
>>> I read articles about old folks crashing all sort of cars becasue
>>> they
>>> screwed up. Maybe you don't hear about an investigation of Buicks
>>> crashing into things becasue there aren't that many cases related
>>> to a
>>> single year/model. Just for grins, I did the following comparison
>>> based onthe NHTSA Database:
>>>
>>> 2007 Toyota Camry (not Solara, not Hybrid):
>>> Component VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL: 146 Complaints,
>>
>> and not a single complaint is from a politically motivated shill!
>> never ever!
>>
>>
>>> 1 death, 16 injuries
>>> Componet: VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL : 2
>>> Compliants, 0
>>> deaths, 4 injuries
>>>
>>> 2007 Buick LACROSSE - 0 Vehicle Speed Control Complaints......
>>>
>>> 2007 Buick LUCERNE
>>> Componet: VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL: 3 Complaints, 1 injury
>>>
>>> So what would you concentrate your investigation on? The vehcile
>>> with
>>> 171 complaints, 1 death, and 20 injuries related to unintneded
>>> acceleration, or the vehciles with 3 complaints, no deaths and one
>>> injuries (at least as reported to NHTSA).
>>>
>>> Ed
>>> Component:
>>>
>>>
>>
>> er, what are the sales volumes of the camry vs. lacrosse? camry vs.
>> lucerne?
>
> I am sure the Camry outsell both Buick models combined greatly. But
> even if it is 10 to one, then the comparison is 15 to 3.

that's very poor statistics from a small sample size.


> I also looked
> at 2007 Malibus (a GM vehicle with sales at least 60% of the Camry) -

where do you live dude? somewhere small and in the middle i'd guess.
because in urban california where i live, a location with real volume,
it's predominantly japanese and german. even kia seem to outsell chevy
for cars. in fact, i just popped down to the supermarket, given what
you say, and looked around the parking lot. there was one malibu that i
could see. i stopped counting camrys after 20.


> it had 2 vehicle speed control complaints. Most of the Carry
> complaints date back to before 2008 (~100 before 2008, most of the
> rest from 2008/early 2009, with a few from 2010).....so Toyota had
> plenty of warning that there was a problem.
>
> You seem to want to categorize anyone complaining about a Toyota as
> shill. So how do you categorize yourself when you keep crapping on
> Ford and GM. I think if you would actually read the NHTSA documents
> available that relate to some of the biggest recalls instituted by
> those companies you would see they were far more co-operative than
> Toyota.

that's bullshit and you know it. frod NEVER admitted their fault on the
exploder. and there were HUNDREDS of DEATHS involved.


> You particularly seem to want to compare the current Toyota
> fiasco with the Explorer Firestone Tire

it wasn't tires. NO vehicle should roll just because it has a flat.
EVER. and if the vehicle does roll, the cabin shouldn't collapse. at
the design phase, this was a known concern raised by the nhtsa. rather
than design properly before production, which they could have, frod
lobbied against cabin crush safety standards because it would cost a few
bucks more. oh, and the then head of nhtsa was replaced.


> issue. No matter what you may
> think, Ford handled that far better than Toyota has handled their
> current problems.

bullshit. frod covered, denied and never admitted a damned thing.
toyota VOLUNTARILY have recalls at a "failure" rate that is
statistically insignificant. more planes crash each year than a toyota
has throttle problems.


> The biggest issue in the Ford Explorer recall was
> assigning blame.

damned right! blame the tire when the vehicle had a design flaw and
it's cabin collapses killing the occupants!


> It was pretty clear that the problem was the tires,

bullshit.


> and it was also clear Bridgestone was trying to weasel out of
> admitting blame.

more bullshit. they showed up at their congressional hearing with their
two most senior execs. frod showed up with a team of execs, lawyers,
and FIVE LOBBYISTS PER REPRESENTATIVE.

besides, what happens when the exploder has a flat? it rolls! any
tire! to say it's a tire issue is either stupidity or whoring for the
ethicsless domestic auto industry.


>While waiting for Bridgestoen to come clean (they
> eventually had to), Ford replaced millions of tires at their expense.

they did, but only after the fix was in. that was cheaper than
admitting liability, the subsequent huge settlements, and taking the
exploder off the road. the only "good" outcome of this was the "new"
exploder hitting the streets mid 2002, not 2003 as was originally
scheduled. there was no attempt to address the actual flaw that had
killed HUNDREDS or take those vehicles off the road.


> Furthermore, if you check the Insurance Industry Statics for Explorers
> of that vintage, you'll discover that Explorers had one of the best
> safety records for mid-sized SUVs (far better than for 4Runners or
> Pathfinders).

so you never bothered to read the nhtsa's stats for that vehicle. it
had a fatal rollover rate THREE TIMES that of its nearest rival.
unsurprisingly, given frod's political lobbying investments, that
statsistal comparison from the nhtsa's website has been removed.


> See
> http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/ictl_pdf/ictl_0900.pdf .

the isuzu trooper rates with a lower injury rate than the exploder???
there's a large stinking dead rat in that garbage pile. the trooper was
subject to a massive rollover scandal that killed sales. strange how
that vehicle was excoriated, but the exploder sits pretty.


> Notice that
> the injury loss rating for 1997-1999 4 Door Ford Explorers was 68. The
> rating for 4 door 4Runners was 98 (100 is average for all vehicles,
> lower is better). So while you may try to smear Ford , the fact is
> Ford handled the Exporer tire problem decently.

so they admitted blame for selling a vehicle they KNEW to be defective
and susceptible to rollover? they didn't lobby to keep the vehicle
excluded from the nhtsa's efforts to make it safer in rollover cabin
crush tests? they didn't show up in d.c. with FIVE LOBBYISTS PER
REPRESENTATIVE?


> I'll agee they
> deserve some blame for installing second rate tires

dude, is doesn't matter if they were using last night's condoms - NO
VEHICLE SHOULD ROLL JUST BECAUSE IT HAS A FLAT. EVER.


> on Explorers in
> the first place, but they did their best to fix the problem as quickly
> as possible when Bridgestone tried to cut and run.

bullshit. politically naive bridgestone stood up and told the truth -
that it's not he tire's fault if the vehicle rolls just because it gets
a flat. you simply don't have the integrity to admit that truth.


>
> Ed
>
>


--
nomina rutrum rutrum
From: Registered User on 15 Feb 2010 19:05
On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 14:47:21 -0800, jim beam <me(a)privacy.net> wrote:

>On 02/15/2010 01:34 PM, C. E. White wrote:
>> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:Sr2dnYxnz7F8JeTWnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net...
>>> On 02/15/2010 12:49 PM, C. E. White wrote:
- snip -
>>>
>>> er, what are the sales volumes of the camry vs. lacrosse? camry vs.
>>> lucerne?
>>
>> I am sure the Camry outsell both Buick models combined greatly. But
>> even if it is 10 to one, then the comparison is 15 to 3.
>
>that's very poor statistics from a small sample size.
>

Those aren't statistics, just numbers thrown at random in an attempt
to substantiate an opinion.

>
>> I also looked
>> at 2007 Malibus (a GM vehicle with sales at least 60% of the Camry) -
>
>where do you live dude? somewhere small and in the middle i'd guess.
>because in urban california where i live, a location with real volume,
>it's predominantly japanese and german. even kia seem to outsell chevy
>for cars. in fact, i just popped down to the supermarket, given what
>you say, and looked around the parking lot. there was one malibu that i
>could see. i stopped counting camrys after 20.
>
- snip -

Supposition and psuedo-random sampling should have no place in any
discussion save those that actually concern supposition and
psuedo-random sampling. If the numbers are to have meaning they should
come from a qualified source. Registration data from R.L.Polk or a
similar service is a powerful tool. The granularity is such that your
local auto parts store's inventory is based upon vehicle registration
data.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: More money for the dealer on Toytoa sales
Next: Toyota makes great cars, they are just overpriced