I was looking at another forum about RAV4's and I saw this thread:
http://rav4world.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20997

It was talking about Toyota quality in general. I was a little surprised about the comments.

It seems that most of us are pretty happy with our 4Runners on this forum. I like both my third and fourth generation 4Runners. I would say, that there might be some truth to some of the remarks. I have heard a few stories about the new Tundra.

Comments?

I can say i agree 100% w/ the comments i read. I have owned over 30 Toyotas so far, the newest being my IS300 (02) and the oldest being a 76 Corolla. The quality has come down a LOT in recent years, even my IS isn't the quality that it would have been if the car was built 15 years prior. i can go on for days w/ examples, but i'm sure nobody really cares for specifics. The dropping quality along w/ the extra boring models offered (including Lexus and Scion), means i would sooner buy and older Toyota and rebuild it before buying a new one off the lot anytime soon.

I don't know, I would have to say I kinda feel that the quality is still good....My whole family has had no problems with toyota.....as far as the quality you should see some of the other cars out there......Toyota is getting bigger or was I should say but I still think they're doing a good job, I couldn't be happier.......As for those Rav4 people, you can just tell they don't love their cars, why they even are on the forum is beyond me if they don't love their cars.....

I have driven Toyotas for 15 years, and I'm afraid that I'd have to agree that Toyota is going in the wrong direction in terms of quality. I think the current 4Runner is solid and I'm happy with mine, but I also see how Toyota is cutting corners on other models, presumably to either save money or keep the sticker price from going too high. The next generation of the 4Runner might have some cool ideas, but I have a horrible feeling that it could be a disappointment in terms of build quality. While the quality may be good compared to the rest of the industry, it's not up to the standard that made Toyota what it is today.

I think its easy to start finding faults in your vehicle, especially after owning it for a number of years, and yes this leads to a false sense of decreasing quality. But a few months ago I helped a friend move house and I drove his Trailblazer and a Dodge Dakota, holy sh!t, talk about pieces of junk.

Toyota can reduce their quality all they like, they are still streets ahead of the competition in my experience.

I see they have a few more posts, they are talking about rattling and cheap interior. I have driven a RAV4, the ineterior seems to have that cheap plastic kind of look. The last generation RAV4 to me had a better interior.

I don't see us all jumping on the band wagon about problems with our 4Runners, sure we have a few members talking, but not like this forum.

Interesting that they talk about the newer cars being cheaper. For me the older 2001 4Runner is gvien me a few problems this year. Since January of this year, I have had a rear tail light go out, one head light go out, CV joints go bad, a new battery. I guess you can say, a battery after 8 years is good and having daylight running head lights and one head light goes bad after 115,000 miles is great. But, the CV joint, I had to buy a $800 drive shaft. My used 2004 4Runner is doing great, brakes are great, no rattles and has been doing well, so I have no complaints on the newer 4Runner.

I guess if I had to complain about Toyota, it is the design. Since they are #1, they make a bland vehicle to appeal to the masses. To me the Camry is too middle of the road. If I buy a sedan, I would get a Honda Accord or a smaller Acura. Now after saying that, I think the 4Runner is really not for the masses, the Highlander would cover that segment.

My 99 SR5 4Runner has cost me $1000 in just over 100K miles other than oil changes/tires. That was for camshaft drive belt/water pump replacement @100K which is normal maintenance. Best quality vehicle of 20+ I have owned. OTOH the new SE 4Runners are selling for $31K just $1K more than I paid in 99. More features too. How can they do this w/o lowering quality? I am unfamiliar with the 4th gen other than 1 test drive last fall. I plan to keep my 99 'til it starts costing me a lot of money yet get a new 4Runner as soon as they decide to come back with the manual transmissions. I may be in for a long wait.

I'm post #19 on that thread over at RAV4 World. You'll notice that I said I was very disappointed with the noisy interior in my RAV4 compared to the vault like ride of my 4Runner.

Can't say I love my RAV4. Can't say I hate my RAV4. I'm a member of the forum because it's a useful site for information. It's not always about it being a love-in with your vehicle.

One thing I do like about the RAV4 is the V6. that thing goes

Yeah, I was a little surprised to see a picture of your 4Runner on the RAV4 froum. I was also surprised by the replys in that thread. It is good that the forum seems open to different opinions.

I was really thinking of a new RAV4 before I bought my used 04 4Runner. I think the RAV4 does have some good points.

Even Toyota themselves admitted that quality slipped a bit around the same time that they current Camry came out. That's not so unusual, considering the fact that Toyota was growing so fast, gaining on GM all the while to become the biggest auto manufacturer in the world.

The funny thing is that I'd still take Toyota with a little slip in quality over almost all other manufacturers at their best.

toyota being better than GM isn't the point, the point for me is that if i could buy a new Toyota from the 80's to late 90's, vs a brand new design from today, i would be in the old school toyota. If you haven't owned multiple toyotas, you won't know what i'm talking about here. I remember the first time i took my stereo out of my 87 Celica GT-S, took me like 45 min, the entire console has to come out to remove enough of the dash to unbolt the stereo, it wasn't some lame plastic clips, or tin clips that will relax w/ time and cause a rattle, it was a bolt in a lot of places, and at least a screw in several others. Toyota has gotten cheap like this in multiple places on the newer models. This is why my IS currently has napkins shut in the glove box to keep it from rattling, and why i've seam welded several places on it to help fix the squeaks and rattles over bumps. The bad part is that i've done about as much as i can to it w/ out doing exterior paint work.

I really miss the old Toyota, back when they offered GT-S options of a few models, and had overbuilt rear wheel drive sports cars! ... yes i really am that bothered by this!

I said Toyota was getting BIGGER than GM, not better. And the fact that they were growing so rapidly definitely made it more difficult to maintain the same level of quality. I remember reading an article where the top execs of Toyota admitted to the problem and promised to start focusing on restoring the level of quality across its entire vehicle line-up.

As far as old versus new Toyotas, I'd take a new one in a heartbeat. Things like plastic clips on the interior don't matter to me nearly as much as the engineering put into the mechanical & electrical systems of the vehicle. New vehicles (not just Toyota) barely need any maintenace these days, other than oil changes. The old school tune-up is absolutely minimal compared to what it used to be years ago. Think about it--no more distributor cap & rotor, no spark plug wires, no more throttle linkages, etc.. And if you are old enough to remember, no points, carb adjustments, multiple V-belts to worry about, etc...

Another big improvement is that the newer Toyotas will not become rust buckets like the old ones did. They've come a long way in that area. So I'll trade off some plastic clips in the interior to have a vehicle that will look good well into its old age and that is likely to run hundreds of thousands of miles with a minimal amount of maintenance.

Not going to rust? Tacoma Frame rails? seems i keep hearing about the Tundra following suit as well. I highly doubt the bodies are going to be that much better than they used to be, but only time will tell on that.

For me i don't mind the tune ups, or any routine maintenance, as much as i do having to tear my interior out to say seam weld as much as i could w/ out doing out side paint work to try and keep the chassis stiff on my damn car. Luckily some of the other known problems w/ the car i had fixed under warranty before they got completely out of hand, and so far only the annoying sunroof rattle has returned. That's next on the list of rattle/squeaks to hunt down in the Lexus.

I guess as long as Toyota can keep making things cheaper, and deleting features that were once available, and people keep buying them, it won't matter. I'll only be giving them money for parts and maintenance items for my older models!

Have you ever seen an old Toyota pickup (before they were called Tacomas) that didn't have severe rust on the bed? The same thing can be said of the bodies of the older Camry and Tercel. They were basically all rust buckets within a few years of salt exposure here in the northeast. Those days are gone forever, as Toyota changed their manufacturing process for their sheet metal. That's the type of rust I was talking about.

But yes, I heard about the Tacoma frame rusting issues. I have not heard anything about the Tundra though. Still, I'd say the Tacoma issues are an isolated incident, limited to that model and only for a specific amount of model years. For the most part, Toyota has made HUGE leaps in fighting rust and corrosion.