Timely review, 4Runner Trail v. Jeep GC

[getz]

There are some owners that have not had a failure yet. You must have visited a BMW forum and must be fully aware of these problems. The failure rates were determined from an independent survey. Do some research and you may want to look out for the symptoms so you don't get caught too far from home.

Koz

I would love to scrutinize this "survey". As from a cost standpoint there is almost no way a company would tolerate a failure rate within that statistical realm. There is no doubt a problem with the part, but I would wager it is far far below the percentage quoted, especially as bmw extended the HPFP warranty to 10 years or 120,000 miles.
-Getz

 

[Koz]

I would love to scrutinize this "survey". As from a cost standpoint there is almost no way a company would tolerate a failure rate within that statistical realm. There is no doubt a problem with the part, but I would wager it is far far below the percentage quoted, especially as bmw extended the HPFP warranty to 10 years or 120,000 miles.
-Getz

http://www.surveymethods.com/previe...1C6F6E18F9ED6DD94ABCCCD8F8BC0C6CDC68F9F99CA89

Koz

 

[004Gunner]

Good article. I thought it was summed up nicely and expected the conclusion. Toyota stated the objective of the new 4Runner and delivered it. The same remains to be seen for the new GC. I'm waiting for CR's take on the GC; The 4Runner's was less than desirable. FWIW, I always thought the GCs had a more "everyday" feel to them and catered more towards car like driving and plush interiors.

On another note, Jeep fuel economy is always suspect. Everytime I read a Jeep's EPA fuel economy, it seems that the observed fuel economy is considerably less, whereas a Toyota's is more inline if not above. I know my fuel economy is better than the EPA estimates for my vehicle.

 

[XJeepguy]

Don't need no stinkin' articles , I know who the winner is ! For poops sake its a damn Cherokee !!! Do they still come with a free tow truck ?

 

[Thai]

Rag mags are part of the media.

Koz

Koz, but you're as bias as anyone because you refuse to see when the rag mags defended Toyota...you just see the times where they rated a Toyota or Lexus lower than 1st place...and then from those times, you come up with one big conclusion that is clearly false.

 

[getz]

http://www.surveymethods.com/previe...1C6F6E18F9ED6DD94ABCCCD8F8BC0C6CDC68F9F99CA89

Koz

Pretty unimpressed given the n value.
-Getz

 

[snhrph]

Already been discussed in depth...

Timely review, 4Runner Trail v. Jeep GC

 

[Thai]

Pretty unimpressed given the n value.
-Getz

Given that high rate, you would think that some trashy lawyer would have opened a class action suit against BMW by now.

 

[Koz]

Koz, but you're as bias as anyone because you refuse to see when the rag mags defended Toyota...you just see the times where they rated a Toyota or Lexus lower than 1st place...and then from those times, you come up with one big conclusion that is clearly false.

Don't you think it is a LITTLE odd that they would ONLY compare the luxury Heep with the off-road version of the 4Runner and no other vehicles? You don't think this comparison was pre-determined? Please!

Koz

 

[Thai]

Don't you think it is a LITTLE odd that they would ONLY compare the luxury Heep with the off-road version of the 4Runner and no other vehicles? You don't think this comparison was pre-determined? Please!

Koz

Maybe those were the only two vehicles that they can get their hands on...the new Jeep GC is not even at dealers yet...so, it is not like MT can find one at every dealer. MT did a good job telling you EXACTLY why they pick this particular GC over this particular 4Runner. In the article, at NO TIME, did MT state that GC is a better vehicle than 4runner in general. No, among the vehicles that they had on hand, which were a 4runner TE and JGC Limited, they picked the JGC for its overall appeal to the AVERAGE customer. They did admit that the 4runner TE is a better vehicle off-road. Why is this so hard to take??? Now, if they say that the JGC is better off-road, then yeah, i can see the magazine's bias. But that is not the case, is it??!!

How can you say that a vehicle like the 4runner TE with solid rear axle, body-on-frame design, etc. be better on-road than a vehicle that is based on a pure crossover (mercedes ML) with unibody and full independent suspension (tuned for on-road performance too!). And this is MOTORTREND afterall, not TRUCK TREND.

 

[snap315]

I'm glad the Jeep came in first place!

I will be trading in my POS stinky 2005 4x4 V8 4Runner for an Overland 4x4 V8 very soon.

:bluejump:

I look forward to being able to drive a vehicle without skunking everyone behind me!!

arty:

 

[004Gunner]

I'm glad the Jeep came in first place!

I will be trading in my POS stinky 2005 4x4 V8 4Runner for an Overland 4x4 V8 very soon.

:bluejump:

I look forward to being able to drive a vehicle without skunking everyone behind me!!

arty:

It's not just 4Runners though. A lot of newer Toyotas have the bad smelling catalyst system. Even mine is sensitive to sulfur content in fuel which is partly the reason I use Shell fuels almost exclusively. I can understand your frustration, especially if it's your 1st Toyota, I just don't know that I would go running to a brand that's infamous for poor reliability. I would go with an Exploder before the GC

 

[Thai]

Don't you think it is a LITTLE odd that they would ONLY compare the luxury Heep with the off-road version of the 4Runner and no other vehicles? You don't think this comparison was pre-determined? Please!

Koz

Koz, since you're so adamant about this issue...check this link out: Best-Selling Midsize Family Sedan Comparison - Motor Trend

Here is a comparo done this year (MARCH 2010) involving the infamous Camry vs. GM vs. Ford vs. Hyundai, etc.. So, if you (and the other paranoid folks) are right, then the Camry should be dead last...and should be the laughing stock for the editors, right? I mean, here is THE vehicle that the "media" has targeted and shit on, right? Remember, this is back in MARCH 2010, when the media was still shitting on Toyota, right? This was when unintended acceleration was still headline news!!!! And you have these wonderful domestics in these tests...surely, the "sole financial supporters" of Motor Trend (aka Ford and GM) would kill MotorTrend if they did not make the Fusion or Chevy Malibu the winner, right?? THIS HAS BEEN YOUR ARGUMENT ALL ALONG, right?

Hmmm, who won? Ahhh, the Camry. Camry 4-cylinder. Camry 4-cylinder BASE model. Let me link to the Camry 1st place: Family Sedan Comparison - 2010 Toyota Camry LE - Motor Trend

In fact, on the next page (Family Sedan Comparison - Toyota Camry Recall - Motor Trend), Motor Trend went well-beyond the article's scope to discuss AND DEFEND the case (unintended acceleration) against Toyota. What the hell is Motor Trend doing here?!! Its sole financial supporters must be furious!!

Guys, i know that it sucks that your vehicle does not win a comparo. So what?! My Sienna lost. My Prius lost. My TSX lost i am sure somewhere. The point is that these mags have priorities that they focus on. These priorities may not coincide with yours...and this is why we sometimes own vehicles that are not top-rated by these rag mags. But, does it mean that these rag mags are corrupt or stupid?? Not at all. Some of their editors probably think that my priorities are stupid...that's OK. Take from the reviews the info that you need and move on. But, lets not get too hell bent on bashing something that we don't fully understand.

As for the fanboys, remember, that there are BMW and Mercedes fanboys who think that Toyota pay off Consumer Reports and JD Powers. Do you believe that? No. Then why do you believe that BMW and whoever pay off Car & Driver or MotorTrend to affect their rankings?

 

[Thai]

You must have searched all your subscriptions to get those numbers! Edmunds got a 13.0 and 4.8 to 60. Again time will tell!

Koz

Selective reading again, huh? Sorry, i misquoted...the GT got 4.4 seconds with MT: 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS vs 2010 Dodge Challenger SRT8 vs 2011 Ford Mustang GT Comparison - Test Numbers - Motor Trend

Everyone else is getting around 4.6 seconds. That is impressive! And doesn't the GT get similar EPA numbers to your Lexus, Koz?!! Maybe 1 mpg penalty in the Stang? And it has a whopping 5.0L V8 with over 400 horses! Did someone here offer cake? I like to eat it too now please!

 

[Jed]

Even though the Mustang is now sporting a 420 hp V8 it is nowhere NEAR the car the 335i, G, IS, or even the TL is. How does that go, you can put lipstick on pig but it's still a pig. You have to remember also, this a redesign. Lets see what the other cars in that class do. The fat lady didn't sing yet! You will also be seeing all the V6s improving their gas milage next year.

In 2011 the V8 420hp Mustang will be the best bang for the buck.

Koz

I think you're missing the whole point of the Mustang. Those buyers don't care about competing with luxury/refinement/amenities of the 335, G, IS, or even the TL. As long as they can blow those cars away, the typical 5.0L Mustang buyer will be a happy camper.

So in that way, I think the fact that Ford came out with a relatively inexpensive car with a very powerful engine means a lot. But I guess it all depends upon how you like to compare two cars. Price is obviously a determining factor for many people, but performance may or may not be. Luxury may or may not be. Reliability may or may not be.... etc...

 

[Jed]

Don't you think it is a LITTLE odd that they would ONLY compare the luxury Heep with the off-road version of the 4Runner and no other vehicles? You don't think this comparison was pre-determined? Please!

Koz

I think they probably didn't have much of a choice. It's fairly well documented that auto mags try their best to match up vehicles for their comparison tests, but sometimes they have to take whatever is available from the manufacturers. My guess is that they just happened to get a Trail 4Runner and a Limited GC. Doesn't make much sense to read too much into that.

 

[LUVDA4RUNNER]

I think they probably didn't have much of a choice. It's fairly well documented that auto mags try their best to match up vehicles for their comparison tests, but sometimes they have to take whatever is available from the manufacturers. My guess is that they just happened to get a Trail 4Runner and a Limited GC. Doesn't make much sense to read too much into that.

They can say whatever they want, but I would take the 4runner over the JGC any day. The reliability with jeep is sketchy at best. 4Runner is bullet proof.

 

[LongBallLarry]

I think they probably didn't have much of a choice. It's fairly well documented that auto mags try their best to match up vehicles for their comparison tests, but sometimes they have to take whatever is available from the manufacturers. My guess is that they just happened to get a Trail 4Runner and a Limited GC. Doesn't make much sense to read too much into that.

Links?

Anyways, each manufac gets their time to shine with each media source. And once it is their turn, they pay for it.

"Hey Ford, nice new gen F150, you are the Truck of the Year. Now pay us." Next year, "Hey Chevy, nice new gen Silverado, you are the Truck of the Year. Now pay us."

 

[Jed]

Links?

Anyways, each manufac gets their time to shine with each media source. And once it is their turn, they pay for it.

"Hey Ford, nice new gen F150, you are the Truck of the Year. Now pay us." Next year, "Hey Chevy, nice new gen Silverado, you are the Truck of the Year. Now pay us."

Links to what? Are you asking for links that support my statement that auto mags often have to make due with the cars that are available for testing? If so, I can only say that I've read many comparison reviews where the cars weren't matched up very well and in the text it was stated that the road test editors would have liked a car optioned differently, but there were no press vehicles available that matched what they wanted at the time the comparison testing was being done. This is fairly common knowledge among regular readers of auto enthusiast magazines.

 

[Jed]

That would explain the lack of auto magazine subscriptions in my house.

Since "most people" do not actually buy automotive-centric magazines, by your own logic, most people must assume the reviews are biased. People buy magazines for all kinds of reasons, but you can't prove that "most people" buy them for their belief in the veracity of the reviews any more than I can prove "most people" buy them for the pretty pictures.

When I say "most people", I'm not talking about a majority of people in the world. I'm talking about most people who buy & read automotive magazines. You know, people like you and me. Enthusiasts. People with an interest in cars in general. I'm not sure how you wouldn't get that.... and again, I'm not "proving" anything, I'm just using common sense.

Common sense should tell you that magazines make money selling advertising pages. Far and away, any magazines largest source of revenue is ad sales, not subscription or rack sales.

You're making your own argument against yourself. Lets take this one step further--- if nobody is buying the magazine, then who is going to advertise in it? Why would a car company spend its advertising dollars on a print ad in "Car and Motor" magazine, when it only prints and distributes only 1,000 magazines each month?

Anyone who has ever taken an advertising/marketing class understands that ad sales are intended to reach a broad audience (or sometimes a niche audience) in the case of car ads. So believe me when I say that no magazine on earth will make money on selling ads if they don't have a decent following. Just won't happen....