Prev: should keylless Prius switch itself off?
Next: Lexus HS Under Performing Sales Target
From: C. E. White on 30 Apr 2010 10:00

"hls" <hls(a)nospam.nix> wrote in message
news:toSdnSBE6IhwSUfWnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
> "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> The GM response to the uproar over intake manifold problems was
>> almost identical to the Toyota response to sludge problems - i.e.,
>> It is your fault. If you took really really really good car of your
>> car, you wouldn't have a problem.
>>
>> Ed
>
> They couldnt even say that about the plenum issue. And the plenum
> issue
> wasnt a safety issue....or was it?

If you ask the lawyers at the Center for Auto Safety it was a safety
issue. But then they think everything is a safety issue becasue that
makes it easier to win liability cases. I think GM claimed that if you
properly serviced your vehicle you would avoid the major damaged that
is attributed to intake manifold related failures (mostly coolant in
the oil, followed by total engine failure) - in other words - you
might have had to pay for a gasket / manifold replacmenet, but you
would not have ruined the engine if you had the thing properly
serviced. I know there is a lot of internet griping about certain GM
intake manifolds, but I don't persoanlly know anyone who suffered from
the problem (but then I only know a few people with GM products - I
know a lot more people who own Toyotas, so I tend to hear a lot more
about Toyota problems, than GM problems).

> Apparently the Sequoia issue isnt a safety issue either, as there
> have been
> no problems because of it...or have there been?

I am sure it depends on who you ask. From what I have read some people
(maybe prompted by lawyters?) say it is a safety issue becasue the
vehicles don't acclerate as expected in some emergency situations, but
no one claims the concern has lead to an accident. My personal opinion
is that it is a Customer Satisfaction issue. However NHTSA did open an
investigation and given the current climate, I think Toyota decided to
avoid any hint of their past habits and recalled the vehicles to
update the software to eliminate the concern. I think the major gripe
of owners that experienced the problem was how they were treated by
Toyota. You know, the usual Toyota policy - the vehicle is perfect,
any problems are the Customer's fault. From what I have read some
Customers were charged big bucks to have the software updated.

Ed


From: hls on 1 May 2010 16:31

"C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:hrenpm$ior$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "hls" <hls(a)nospam.nix> wrote in message
> news:toSdnSBE6IhwSUfWnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>
>> "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>> The GM response to the uproar over intake manifold problems was almost
>>> identical to the Toyota response to sludge problems - i.e., It is your
>>> fault. If you took really really really good car of your car, you
>>> wouldn't have a problem.
>>>
>>> Ed
>>
>> They couldnt even say that about the plenum issue. And the plenum issue
>> wasnt a safety issue....or was it?
>
> If you ask the lawyers at the Center for Auto Safety it was a safety
> issue. But then they think everything is a safety issue becasue that makes
> it easier to win liability cases. I think GM claimed that if you properly
> serviced your vehicle you would avoid the major damaged that is attributed
> to intake manifold related failures (mostly coolant in the oil, followed
> by total engine failure) - in other words - you might have had to pay for
> a gasket / manifold replacmenet, but you would not have ruined the engine
> if you had the thing properly serviced. I know there is a lot of internet
> griping about certain GM intake manifolds, but I don't persoanlly know
> anyone who suffered from the problem (but then I only know a few people
> with GM products - I know a lot more people who own Toyotas, so I tend to
> hear a lot more about Toyota problems, than GM problems).
>
>> Apparently the Sequoia issue isnt a safety issue either, as there have
>> been
>> no problems because of it...or have there been?
>
> I am sure it depends on who you ask. From what I have read some people
> (maybe prompted by lawyters?) say it is a safety issue becasue the
> vehicles don't acclerate as expected in some emergency situations, but no
> one claims the concern has lead to an accident. My personal opinion is
> that it is a Customer Satisfaction issue. However NHTSA did open an
> investigation and given the current climate, I think Toyota decided to
> avoid any hint of their past habits and recalled the vehicles to update
> the software to eliminate the concern. I think the major gripe of owners
> that experienced the problem was how they were treated by Toyota. You
> know, the usual Toyota policy - the vehicle is perfect, any problems are
> the Customer's fault. From what I have read some Customers were charged
> big bucks to have the software updated.
>
> Ed

I think we agree rather closely on this one.

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: should keylless Prius switch itself off?
Next: Lexus HS Under Performing Sales Target