What percentage of 20 year old cars are on the road?
in [Toyota]
|
From: Scott Dorsey on 28 Oct 2009 07:09 Tegger <invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote: >kludge(a)panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in >> >> This morning I parked my '74 next to a Desoto and a '54 MG at work. >> And I work for an outfit that's supposed to be doing state of the art >> technology, too. >> >> The guy with the Model A wasn't there, though. He took the Maverick >> in. > >You work in a very unusual place, I must say. Does your company hire only >one-upmans? No, mostly geeks. Believe me, the car dealers and hardware stores near the base have some stories... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
From: C. E. White on 28 Oct 2009 07:43 "JoeSpareBedroom" <newstrash(a)frontiernet.net> wrote in message news:7MEFm.33364$eJ4.30955(a)newsfe07.iad... > "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message > news:4ae71565$1(a)kcnews01... > >> >> "JoeSpareBedroom" <newstrash(a)frontiernet.net> wrote in message >> news:08EFm.33212$eJ4.26377(a)newsfe07.iad... >>> "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message >>> news:4ae70c7c$1(a)kcnews01... >>>>A Toyota commercial they are running in my area claims that 80% of >>>>all >>>>Toyota sold in the last 20 years are still on the road. This >>>>seemed to be a >>>>very low number to me. What do other think? >>>> >>>> I would have thought given Toyota's increase in sales over the >>>> last twenty >>>> years they would have had more like 90% of the cars sold in the >>>> last 20 >>>> years still on the road. Toyota sales have been increasing over >>>> the last >>>> twenty years, so a higher percentage of Toyotas will be newer >>>> models. >>>> Since a high percentage of Toyotas are newer vehicles that are >>>> more likely >>>> to still be on the road, the overall percentage of Toyotas sold >>>> in the >>>> last 20 years will be higher (becasue of the newer car bias). For >>>> GM, the >>>> math works the other way. GM sales have been stagnent or actually >>>> declining over the last 20 years, so a higher percentage of their >>>> cars >>>> will be older and therefore less likely to still be on the road. >>>> I am sure >>>> the 80% number is based on registrations, so it might be that it >>>> over >>>> estimates the number actually in daily use - or under estimates >>>> it in >>>> cases where cars are used off road (or illeagally) and not >>>> registered. >>>> >>>> Does anyone have any actual numbers? >>> >>> >>> State motor vehicle deparments probably have the data, although it >>> might >>> need to be massaged in order to make sense of it. If magazines & >>> newspapers >>> can get the information, you probably can too. That's a big "if", >>> though. It >>> might cost money. >> >> I should have been a little clearer. I am sure RL Polk & Co. has >> amassed the registration data for all the US into a huge database. >> RL Polk is in the buisness of selling this information. Ads >> claiming longevity often reference RL Poolk data as the source of >> the claim, but I can't access the raw data without paying for it. I >> was hoping there was an open source (i.e. free), possibly a >> simplified version, available to the public. Without being to >> actually see the data, it is hard to know how to treat the claims >> based on the data. I once wrote Chevy and asked about their claim >> that Chevy makes the longest lasting most reliable trucks. All they >> said was that it was based on RL Polk registration data for a >> particualr period. Of course without actually ahving access to the >> data, I can't see how the claim means anything. Even worse, even if >> I had the raw registration data, I doubt it is meaningful unless >> you also know how the trucks were actully used. I always assumed >> that a higher percentage of Chevy trucks were purchased by suburban >> users than was the case for Ford (i.e., more Fords were in >> commercial use / farm use / fleet use), and therefore the Chevy >> trucks were more liekly to be gently used, better cared for, and >> used less, so therefore registration data byear alone would tend to >> suggest they lasted longer... which might not really be true for >> vehicles used in the same manner by similar populations of users. >> >> I guess the old statement that "Figures don't lie, but liars >> figure" sums up the problem with claims made based on RL Polk >> registration data. I've always assumed that manufacturers actually >> have good data, but that they have no intention of publishing it. >> No manufactuer builds perfect vehciles, and if they start putting >> out the good data, sooner of later someone is going to demand to >> see the bad data as well, and use a lawsuit to pry it out into the >> open. Better to make unverifiable claims based on third party >> information that can be checked but don't actually prove anything. >> >> I am 100% sure that Toyota is telling the truth when they say 80% >> of the Toyotas sold in the last twenty years are still on the road. >> I am also certain that it is virtually a meaningless statement, but >> that it sounds like it means something important. It is the perfect >> sort of marketing claim - true, verifiable, and easily >> missunderstood to be more significant than it is. At least that is >> how I see it. >> >> Ed >> > > > Write to Polk and ask if anyone (maybe a magazine) has published > articles which answer your questions using that data. > > While you're at it, see if they have any data which backs up your > bullshit claims about what types of people buy certain brands of > trucks for particular purposes ("work" versus "just to haul > groceries and the dog"). I can have an opinion or make assumptions about how trucks are used. I don't think my assumptions or opinions are the same as "data." If you disagree with my opinions, I get that. But you need to recognize the difference between opinions and data. Maybe I need to include "I think," or "I beleive," or "it seems like" in front of every statement, but wouldn't that be tiresome. And of course, you need to do the same. When I present something as a fact, I usually try to cite a source. Otherwise you can assume my statemens represent an opinion, a persoanl observation, or an assumption. The statements may indeed be wrong, or silliy, or even stupid, but they are mine. As for how trucks are used, I can only go by what I see in my little corner(s) of the world. Mostly, where I farm, the overwhelming choice for pickups are Ford SuperDuties with a few F150s. Then Chevy Silverados (mostly HD), and then Dodges (again, mostly HD). I know one farmer with a Frontier (like I used to have), but he also has an F250. I also know one farmer with a Tundra (the old better style). He has an F250 also. Most of the "new" Tundras I see are parked in town. They are new, clean, and shiny with mostly empty beds. I realize this might be too small a sample to be meaningful beyond my area, but it is the best I have. Maybe where you live, all the contractors love Tundras. Where I live it seems Tundras are mostly owned by people who have day jobs in town and plenty of time to polish the truck. It seems unlikely to me that Contractors overwhelmingly prefer Tundras anywhere given the relatively poor Tundra sales. Even when the new Tundra sales were "great" they had less than 10% of the big pickup market. So unless all the Tundra are going to contractors, it seems unlikely they can be that common as contractor trucks anywhere. The local electric co-op did buy one this year. It will be interesting to see if they buy more in the future. They buy based on sealed bids, so I guess the Toyota dealer gave them the lowest price. Ed
From: C. E. White on 28 Oct 2009 07:45 "JoeSpareBedroom" <newstrash(a)frontiernet.net> wrote in message news:XjGFm.5$qe6.3(a)newsfe14.iad... > "Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2(a)lycos,com> wrote in message > news:4ae73098$0$18744$ce5e7886(a)news-radius.ptd.net... >> One has to wonder what difference our friend Joe$#itForBrains >> thinks it makes as to why people chose to buy what they buy with >> their own money? > > > It matters because in another thread, CE White made claims about who > buys what brands of trucks. I stated an opinion. Don't confuse that with a claim or data. I can make assumptions and have opinions. Ed
From: SMS on 28 Oct 2009 10:01 C. E. White wrote: > A Toyota commercial they are running in my area claims that 80% of all > Toyota sold in the last 20 years are still on the road. This seemed to > be a very low number to me. What do other think? There was a study in Canada about this. For vehicles 11-20 years old, a 2006 Canadian study showed the following order for highest percentage of cars still on the road in Canada adjusted for how many were originally sold): 1. Lexus 2. Mercedes 3. Saturn 4. Infiniti 5. Acura 6. BMW 7. Volvo 8. Cadillac 9. Jaguar 10. Lincoln 11. Toyota 12. Honda 13. Mazda 14. Saab 15. Buick 16. Volkswagen 17. Chrysler 18. Nissan ---Industry Average--- 19. Oldsmobile 20. Subaru 21. Chevrolet 22. Ford 23. Pontiac 24. Audi 25. Mercury 26. Eagle 27. Dodge 28. Suzuki 29. Plymouth 30. Isuzu 31. Hyundai 32. Lada They warn that this data needs to interpreted correctly. Owners of older expensive luxury cars are more likely to repair their vehicle than junk it. Vehicles sold in large numbers into rental fleets rack up a lot of miles and have shorter life in years, but not necessarily in miles. Some vehicles in the list didn't exist 20 years prior to the study so there were no vehicles 16-20 years old, only vehicles 11-15 years old (this explains the anomaly of Saturn). Bottom line is that for vehicle brands in existence for the full 11-20 year time span, Toyota had the highest percentage of vehicles still on the road for non-luxury brands. What's also interesting is that vehicles like Volkswagen, which routinely ranks far below average in reliability, did relatively well. "http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/2006/060905-1.htm"
From: dr_jeff on 28 Oct 2009 10:25
The numbers are misleading, however. You can have a Lexus that has 200,000 mi going strong after 20 years, and a Ford Focus that has been worn out after 500,000 after 3 years. SMS wrote: > C. E. White wrote: >> A Toyota commercial they are running in my area claims that 80% of all >> Toyota sold in the last 20 years are still on the road. This seemed to >> be a very low number to me. What do other think? > > There was a study in Canada about this. > > For vehicles 11-20 years old, a 2006 Canadian study showed the following > order for highest percentage of cars still on the road in Canada > adjusted for how many were originally sold): > > 1. Lexus > 2. Mercedes > 3. Saturn > 4. Infiniti > 5. Acura > 6. BMW > 7. Volvo > 8. Cadillac > 9. Jaguar > 10. Lincoln > 11. Toyota > 12. Honda > 13. Mazda > 14. Saab > 15. Buick > 16. Volkswagen > 17. Chrysler > 18. Nissan > ---Industry Average--- > 19. Oldsmobile > 20. Subaru > 21. Chevrolet > 22. Ford > 23. Pontiac > 24. Audi > 25. Mercury > 26. Eagle > 27. Dodge > 28. Suzuki > 29. Plymouth > 30. Isuzu > 31. Hyundai > 32. Lada > > They warn that this data needs to interpreted correctly. Owners of older > expensive luxury cars are more likely to repair their vehicle than junk > it. Vehicles sold in large numbers into rental fleets rack up a lot of > miles and have shorter life in years, but not necessarily in miles. Some > vehicles in the list didn't exist 20 years prior to the study so there > were no vehicles 16-20 years old, only vehicles 11-15 years old (this > explains the anomaly of Saturn). > > Bottom line is that for vehicle brands in existence for the full 11-20 > year time span, Toyota had the highest percentage of vehicles still on > the road for non-luxury brands. > > What's also interesting is that vehicles like Volkswagen, which > routinely ranks far below average in reliability, did relatively well. > > "http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/2006/060905-1.htm" |