IMO, this survey is of little value.
If one really wants to know a brands quality standing, ask the owners of the 7 (seven) year olds - not the new car owners.
This is just plain silly !
They even ask about "styling" - which has nothing to do with quality..
And only Buick and Cadillac are doing well, NOT Chevrolet and Pontiac, so GM does have a ways to go..

I wonder if they know why Buick is doing so well ??

Earthworm, I'm in agreement with your statement there - I hadn't realised that JD Power in the USA was brand new cars until I looked and saw the Scion tC in the listings. The UK version asks owners of cars between 2 and 3 years old, which at least gives a better idea about reliability than comparing a car purchased 3 months ago with one purchased 6 years ago.

It's actually something I butted heads about with another UK publication that runs their own survey. They claim it to be statistically significant, yet couldn't answer how they can justify it when the cars surveyed range wildly in age.

JD Power DOES do long-term reliability surveys out to 3 years.

Which, by the way, the 2001 Chevrolet Malibu got 1st place in the midsize category (results released back in July 2004 if I recall correctly).

I've owned cars and trucks from various car companies.First two were GM-total junk!Ford was a little better and Dodge a lot worse.Granted those car companies have gotten better since the 70s,but the last GM vehicle I rented 5 years ago had 2k on the odo and the knobs were already falling off the radio!Toyota will stand up to regular use or hard abuse and keep coming back for more in my experience.I don't need any JD Pooper ratings to tell me THAT!

Someone (under the age of 8 most likely) probably yanked the knobs off the radio in that rental car.

... "JD Pooper ratings"

... bwahahahaha!

Things like radios and interior switches won't stand up to abuse in any car. They're plastic and they break easily. That's true of every car on the road. If you pound on them or slam things against them, they'll break. I've seen ratty looking interiors in plenty of Toyotas. That's a function of the owner, not the manufacturer.

I was debating on whether I should mention that Toyota uses or used radios from the same OEM as GM (Delphi). I guess I will.

I'll also point out that the 2004 Toyota Matrix and Pontiac Vibe use the same exact radio, from Delphi..and it's a GM style radio.

Enough about radio knobs.The rental car also made a thunking noise from the left front end even going over moderate highway bumps,doubt if some bratty kid had anything to do with that!My sister bought a used Camry demo and hasn't had a single problem with it in over 5 years.Before that she had a new Dodge Dynasty that kept losing reverse gear,then an Ford Explorer that was a real lemon! She still can't quite believe there are cars out there that can be relatively trouble free after her bad experience with inferior iron.

But I'm not totally biased against American cars as I am thinking of buying a C4 Vette in the near future as a weekend car.Always loved Vettes and Mustangs,despite any problems that might be inherent to them.

Here's the point, though: Why do Japanese car buyers so often feel the need to state how much better their vehicles are than those made elsewhere? That's what I don't understand. I think there's somewhat of a snob factor there. If you buy an American car, you are a redneck or at least an unsophisticated poor soul who was duped into buying junk. Yet if you bought Japanese, you were smart. This is despite the fact that the numbers in surveys such as the one at the top of this thread show that many U.S. made cars had better initial quality than many Japanese makes. Probably more significant, the difference between Honda, which is held up as a paragon of reliability for which buyers pay premium prices, and Ford or Chevy, which are both routinely bashed, was so small as to be essentially insignificant. (116 problems per 100 vehicles for Honda, 127 each for Ford and Chevy.) So is an Accord worth its $5,000 price premium over a Malibu for less than 10 percent better quality? It definitely makes you wonder what's really the smart purchase there.

You'll find buyers who've had bad experiences with every make of car on the road. Some of it is bad luck, some of it is poor maintenance, and some of it is just buyer perception. (If you get into a car looking for things not to like, you'll find some. On the other hand, if you get in with the expectation that this is a "quality" car, you'll just as easily find things to support that perception.)

Probably the most damaging impression that comes out of all of this is the idea that a 10 or 15 year old Japanese car with 125,000 miles on it is somehow a good deal even if it's selling for half its "new" price. I know many people who have bought old Hondas and Toyotas for grossly inflated prices and thought they were getting "quality," only to find that they had bought overpriced pieces of junk that were very costly to keep running. Can you buy a 10 or 15 year old American car that's nothing but junk? Of course. But I'd rather gamble $3,000 on an old car than $8,000. Any quality advantage that Honda or Toyota may have had when they were new has evaporated by the time they are past 100,000 miles. At that point, the condition of the car is 95 percent dependent on how it's been cared for, not who made it.

"Enough about radio knobs."

You brought them up. Perhaps you shouldn't have made the comment if you didn't want to hear about it?

"Why do Japanese car buyers so often feel the need to state how much better their vehicles are than those made elsewhere?"

You'd think it'd be self-evident, and their constant proclamations about such would not be necessary.

Why take a rental car you once had and generalize that to all domestic cars? Given the way some people drive rental cars, you have NO IDEA what it's been through.

What valid conclusions can you possibly draw from the way a rental car performs?

"Yet if you bought Japanese, you were smart."

If it makes them think so, so be it. I'm not the one running the science experiment with multiple variables.

Maybe then rental car was a bad example,but it was the last GM car I drove.Toyota is investing 44% more into itself and is enjoying record sales,while GM has lost over 1 billion in it's last quarter.Doesn't take a genius to see which company is currently more successful.

The financial fortunes of companies are always changing. GM was flying very high a few years back; now they're in a slump. That company's level of profitability doesn't have anything to do with the quality of its products, anyway.

FWIW, I have read that some analysts feel Toyota is spending too much money right now to overtake GM for the world number one spot in car sales. (GM will still be on top for total vehicles, including trucks.)

GM's 1 billion loss is mainly due to them paying FIAT off. Which is probably the best possible option that they could have chosen. The alternative would have been to buy FIAT.

I notice that they sold their EMD divison to Greenbriar Equity Group LLC and Berkshire Partners LLC. "Terms of the transaction will not be disclosed"...

...but I can tell you that GM is worth at least $45billion.
A $45billion company losing $1billion in 3 months is like..someone with a net worth of $150k losing $3333 in 3 months. (Might happen if their furnace/AC breaks down).

Just to put it in perspective.

I haven't heard that Toyota is trying to overtake GM in total sales worldwide ,do you have a link? In fact since GM and Toyota are stepping up their partnership to corraborate on future vehicles they would sort of be competing against themselves!GM didn't get to where they are by being stupid and increasing their involvement with Toyota will only reap dividends for them as well as Toyota.

Cowboy : The financial fortunes of companies are always changing. GM was flying very high a few years back; now they're in a slump. That company's level of profitability doesn't have anything to do with the quality of its products, anyway.

E-worm : This rare time I disagree, Indy.
IMO, quality, both real and perceived, have much to do with profits, particularly long term profits...
Companies err frequently in having the wrong men at the helm. Having a QC nut running the show would be disastrous..
GM and others goof by having the bean-counters make final decisions.. Engineers, out of control, can bankrupt a company..
So the product must be balanced, but must always be of good quality..Volkswagen seems to have forgotten this...

"Here's the point, though: Why do Japanese car buyers so often feel the need to state how much better their vehicles are than those made elsewhere? That's what I don't understand. I think there's somewhat of a snob factor there....."

No, there isn't a large difference in the number of problems per hundred vehicles b/w GM, Ford, and Honda/Toyota. However, its more complicated than that. Consider the resale value on many GM models, which is dismal, by purchasing a GM/Ford product you, can be throwing away thousands of dollars. So yes, buying a Japanese car can be considered a "wiser" choice. Maybe these "snobby" Japanese car buyers feel superior because they've done their homework and bought a better product at a better price (NOTE: The total cost of owning a car is MORE than whats on the sticker, typically Japanese cars turn out to be cheaper, despite their initially costing more).

And so what, Buick is at the top of the charts???? It should be, considering the model lifecycle is significantly longer than its competition. The Century and Regal which were just replaced with the LaCrosse this year, were first designed in 1997 and sold through 2005, THATS EIGHT YEARS!! Twice that of the Japanese models (Accord/Camry redesign every 4/5 years). They've had plenty of time to "fine tune" them. The Rainier, deployed in 2004, is a rebadged Trailblazer they came out in 2002, so again, plenty of time to get all the bugs out. Oh yeah, guess I should mention the Park Avenue was designed in '97 as well. So perhaps you can see why I'm not "blown away" by the survey results.

In summation I have to say that GM is getting what it deserves. For quite some time they have been putting out products that are largely inferior to that of the competition. GM is still plagued by bonehead management and high labor costs.

Maybe if the other manufactures did not start over with there cars so often they would have made the list?Why do they need to introduce a new model every 4 years?I will not buy a new released model.I do not want the headaches of bugs.Exactly the reason I went with a 05 Buick Century.Reliabilty is more important to me then style.

Im not ready for a Rice Burner no matter where they are built.Gm introduced to many new production vehicals in one year.Then put things like electric steering on them.I feel thats there slump.Im surley not the only GM customer afraid of change?Things should turn around for GM after the new line up prooves its self.Plus hopefully the trend toward buying non USA products as if to get even will change.I know many of the import brands are made here.But it feeds out of country banks.As soon as there free tax ride here in the stated is over.They will pull out and leave the USA workers high and dry anyway.

Oaa9898, you say Japanese car buyers have "done their homework." How many people in this country haven't heard all the hype about how wonderful the Accord and Camry are? It seems to me it's more accurate to say many of these buyers are just going along with a trend.

But you're right about resale value, which is based on market perceptions of a car rather than reality. For someone who buys only new rather than used cars and trades every few years, an Accord or Camry is not a bad choice, because they do hold their value well. However, these people aren't the average car owners, because the average car on U.S. roads is almost 9 years old. And many people, myself included, buy a car to keep it for a long time. For these groups of people -- who represent far more people than the two or three year traders -- the Accord and Camry don't represent a very good deal.

And as I mentioned above, the worst deal goes to those who pay top dollar for old Hondas and Toyotas based on all the wonderful things they've heard about them, and wind up getting grossly overpriced junk. But yes, for the person who sold that car to them, it was a "good deal." That didn't, however, make it a good car.

No, I wouldn't expect anyone to be impressed with the J.D. Power survey results. People who are strongly committed to a brand will stick with it regardless, just as people who dislike a brand won't take much notice of surveys or other data challenging their impressions. I think Honda and Toyota both make good cars, but if you look at the facts, they aren't perfect, and many other companies in the U.S. and elsewhere also make very good cars. Market perception, which determines resale value, will take some time to adjust to the fact that the Accord and Camry are no longer significantly better than many other offerings from different manufacturers.

i have owned 3 new dodge trucks, 2 new g.m. trucks, 4 new ford trucks, 1 new nissan truck, 2 new toyota trucks, and a few used trucks of different brands, and i can say without a doubt that, i didnt see any real quality differenses between any of them. some had features that i liked better than others. but i make my decisions on what to buy, the old fashioned way, what ever i got the best price on! paint them all black take the name off, and i couldnt tell the diff.

Im surley not the only GM customer afraid of change?Things should turn around for GM after the new line up prooves its self.

But what you like about GM is what most other people dislike. Other manufacturers took the risk and managed to successfully create new types of vehicles (neither the pony car nor the minivan came from GM and they didn't produce the Vega until small foreign cars already made sales inroads). The Japanese proved that small cars didn't have to be crude and nasty. Several manufacturers moved to overhead cam engines and ultra-low-emissions engines well before GM. GM itself says that one of their problems is that their old SUVs and trucks are not selling well. There's a short distance between "conservative" and "stale" and "well behind the times" and GM has crossed it frequently lately.

Plus hopefully the trend toward buying non USA products as if to get even will change.I know many of the import brands are made here.But it feeds out of country banks.As soon as there free tax ride here in the stated is over.They will pull out and leave the USA workers high and dry anyway.

I don't agree. The Toyota plant in Kentucky (as an example) is paying American workers. They pay Kentucky and U.S. taxes. They fork over big time for power from an American gas and electric company. Their uniforms are cleaned in Kentucky, not Japan. They probably buy their office supplies from an American company. Yes, profit is going to an overseas company. But many American companies (including GM and Ford and -- gasp! -- DaimlerChrysler) make money (and spend it) outside the U.S.

And while I'm concerned about keeping Americans employed, I also realize that we can't put up signs that say "Foreigners keep out" without expecting the same sentiment when GM, Ford, etc. go to sell cars in Europe or South America. It scares the he!! out of me that the current Administration thinks the U.S. can be healthy on its own. But that's another topic. And we should be happy that Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Mazda, Subaru, and Hyundai have chosen to build their factories in the U.S. If you're going to go halfway around the world, you can go someplace like Mexico or South America where the labor is much, much cheaper. At least we keep some skilled jobs here....

I dought there paying a huge tax.They get a huge tax break for coming over here.Wait till there tax break expires and they pull out.GM is not the only one laying off.Mitsibishi here in Illinois laid off a very high percentage also.There tax break expired.

"Maybe if the other manufactures did not start over with there cars so often they would have made the list?Why do they need to introduce a new model every 4 years?I will not buy a new released model.I do not want the headaches of bugs.Exactly the reason I went with a 05 Buick Century.Reliabilty is more important to me then style."

The purpose of redesigning cars every 4-5 years is so that they can provide a thoroughly modern car on a consistent basis. For example, the new Accord and Camry Models offer side and side curtain airbags, and an in dash CD changer, and offerings of features like heated leather seats come out with every new model. And guess who sells more cars??? That's right, Honda and Toyota. Guess who has better crash test scores, more safety features, and more standard equipment??? Honda & Toyota. And they provide these new models every 4/5 years and they're are extremely reliable, despite being new. Oh, and Honda and Toyota did make the list. That's right, Honda and Toyota. Guess who has better crash test scores, more safety features, more standard equipment??? Honda & Toyota. And they provide these new models every 4/5 years and they're are extremely reliable, despite being new. Oh, and Honda and Toyota did make the list.

"Plus hopefully the trend toward buying non USA products as if to get even will change.I know many of the import brands are made here.But it feeds out of country banks.As soon as there free tax ride here in the stated is over.They will pull out and leave the USA workers high and dry anyway."

Actually, most companies from Japan and now South Korea built plants here to avoid taxes (read: Tariffs) in the first place. The Japanese aren't stupid, in the 70s Reagan had to make them agree to voluntary export restraints so that the big three would stop whining. Aparently the big three doesn't see the benefits of free trade! Fact is, if the Japanese hadn't exposed our market to a higher quality car, we'd be driving the same junk they built in the 70s. The Japanese cars built here are made by American workers, with many domestic suppliers sending them parts, and we are all better off for it. Isn't the concept of free markets great?

"But you're right about resale value, which is based on market perceptions of a car rather than reality. For someone who buys only new rather than used cars and trades every few years, an Accord or Camry is not a bad choice, because they do hold their value well. However, these people aren't the average car owners, because the average car on U.S. roads is almost 9 years old. And many people, myself included, buy a car to keep it for a long time. For these groups of people -- who represent far more people than the two or three year traders -- the Accord and Camry don't represent a very good deal."

I don't know where you live, but most consumers don't own the same car for anywhere near the 9-year mark - especially with the phenomena of leasing. However, if you check quality surveys, the number of problems per hundred vehicles for three, five, and seven years is still lower for Japanese models (not only with J.D. Power but Consumer Reports as well). The resale value is also higher. So I don't know how you can say the Accord and Camry don't represent a "good deal". You can continue to come up with bogus non-reasons for buying domestic cars; or, just come out and say that you're only comfortable owning an American make. Until then I will (as will the majority of consumers) continue to do what is in my economic best interest. That is, buying the best product at the best price. If that makes me "snobby", so be it.

It doesn't matter where I live; that's a nationwide statistic; the average car on U.S. roads is 9 years old; the average truck is 8 years old. That comes from the U.S. Department of Transportation (see link).

That doesn't mean that the average person owns a car for 9 years. Most vehicles are bought used. The "phenomena of leasing" has resulted in used vehicles representing an even higher share of the nation's fleet.

I've owned both U.S. and foreign cars, and I own a Japanese motorcycle, so it's neither fair nor accurate to attempt to characterize what I am or am not comfortable with. As I said in my post above, however, many Japanese car buyers do for some reason feel the need to cast in a negative light those who do not arrive at the same conclusions regarding vehicles as they do, and obviously that's all you're trying to do here. The comment that "you don't know where I live" in reference to the average age of cars is obviously a way to imply that I am from a place where no one can afford a new car, and then on top of that, I'm just a xenophobe who's "not comfortable" with foreign cars.

But then when you make comments that are actually about cars rather than just bashing me personally, they're either so vague as to be pointless, or just completely false. You have asserted that Honda and Toyota "sell more cars," but do not say more than whom. GM? So you're going to compare two companies to one? You make a completely unsupported generalization that Honda and Toyota have "better crash test scores, more safety features, more standard features," again, not specifying any specific models, nor to whom you're comparing them. So what you have said is that a Toyota Corolla is safer, has more standard features, and better crash test scores than any model (I guess) from GM or any other domestic company.

It's pretty obvious who's making the "bogus" claims here.

A couple other points: The "majority" of consumers aren't buying Hondas and Toyotas, and I've never made a single attempt to convince anyone not to buy a Japanese car, so you won't get any arguments from me when you choose to do what you believe is in your "economic best interest."

The question is, are you willing to afford other consumers who may arrive at a different decision the same level of respect?

Cowboykind,

There was little confusion about what models I had been comparing, the Honda Accord and the Toyota Camry. Given that the Accord and Camry are the best selling vehicles in America, I don't think that it's inappropriate to generalize when using them. Even if I were comparing other models in the line up, generally Japanese models are superior over their American counterparts. Picking apart and comparing EVERY model to its competition is inefficient and unnecessary to make my point.

"As I said in my post above, however, many Japanese car buyers do for some reason feel the need to cast in a negative light those who do not arrive at the same conclusions regarding vehicles as they do, and obviously that's all you're trying to do here."

You couldn't be any more correct if you tried - thanks for pointing out the obvious. The game here is numbers, whether they be lower or higher. A lower number of problems and a greater number of dollars back in resale value. Safety is another area, the Accord and Camry have a lower number of deaths per 100 vehicle crashes then the Malibu, Taurus, etc. (Sources will be listed at the bottom). So yes, it is hard for a consumer of a Camry/Accord to see why other people chose an American model. They cost more, they aren't as safe, and they don't hold their value as well. Why waste your money when you don't have to? Its not as if the average midsize family sedan buyer is filthy rich. All of the information you need to make a good purchasing decision is well published and free to the public.

"It doesn't matter where I live; that's a nationwide statistic; the average car on U.S. roads is 9 years old; the average truck is 8 years old. That comes from the U.S. Department of Transportation (see link)."

"For these groups of people [long-term car owners] -- who represent far more people than the two or three year traders -- the Accord and Camry don't represent a very good deal."

My posting went beyond whether or not the average age of a car on U.S. road is, the point was that whether you are looking at a period of three years of ownership, or nine, the Japanese cars, as a whole, tend to hold up better than American cars, having fewer repairs. The Japanese models, for the millionth time, hold their value better. This all leads to the same conclusion, Japanese cars cost less than American cars. This argument was aimed at your baseless assertion that people who own their cars longer aren't served well by the purchase of an Accord or Camry, when in fact they're better off then with a domestic model - period.

"The "majority" of consumers aren't buying Hondas and Toyotas, and I've never made a single attempt to convince anyone not to buy a Japanese car, so you won't get any arguments from me when you choose to do what you believe is in your "economic best interest."

Ok, for the last fifty posts I've made, I've been comparing the Accord & Camry, but that is inconsequential. But yes, the majority of consumers buying midsize family sedans are choosing the Accord & Camry. Companies like Toyota, Honda, and now Hyundai are continuing to eat into GM dwindling 25% market share. Thanks to GM, Ford, and Daimler-Chrysler's loser management, the Japanese have a 96% share of the hybrid marketplace. In one of their annual reports, a spokesperson for GM on CNBC said that developing hybrids didn't make economic sense. This means that Detroit is in the same position it was in the '70s. It was getting rich off of selling gas-guzzling vehicles, then, a rise in price and a reduction in supply of gas happened....cut to the Japanese gloating. The Japanese have only been selling cars here for a little over thirty years, and have just started producing trucks & SUVs within the past decade, give them time.

Death Statistics - IIHS/HLDI - www.hwysafety.org

Hybrid Market Share - www.isecorp.com/ise_news/ ise_press_articles/pdf/usatoday-news.pdf

I do not believe the Hondas or Toyotas will last like the Big 3 domestics.Well maybe as well as a Chrysler Dodge products.Because there life expectancy is also low.I still see a lot of 20 year old GM vehicals on the road.Those Olsmobile Cutlass supremes from the mid 80's are every place.Along with many other GM vehicals.I have not seen the Hondas and Toyotas very often.

I will not say I would not consider a import brand.Those Hyudai and KIA's are cheap to buy.They look like a Ford for a fraction of the price.Thats a good thing.But no way will I pay more for less.Like the Honda and Toyotas.If I buying less it better be cheaper.

"I do not believe the Hondas or Toyotas will last like the Big 3 domestics.Well maybe as well as a Chrysler Dodge products.Because there life expectancy is also low.I still see a lot of 20 year old GM vehicals on the road.Those Olsmobile Cutlass supremes from the mid 80's are every place.Along with many other GM vehicals.I have not seen the Hondas and Toyotas very often."

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense what-so-ever. First of all, from reading the posts I've seen that you live in a rural area. Rural areas are less inclined to purchase foreign automobiles than urban areas. That would be like someone who lives in Southern Ohio saying that domestic makes don't last as long because they don't see many around. Wait! That's right, they build Hondas in southern Ohio. Or me, who lives in the NE part of the state, saying that foreign cars don't last long because there are tons of Cavaliers everywhere. Wait Again! I live in an area that produces the Chevrolet Cavalier/Pontiac Sunfire (now the Cobalt). Maybe that's why I see them? Just because you don't see them doesn't mean that they aren't out there. On average, Japanese models have fewer problems, and therefore one could surmise that they will last longer. Another note, Honda and Toyota didn't really start volume selling until the early '90s, wait a few more years, then take a trip into the city, you'll see them.

Most of the cars parked on the shoulder here in the Washington, DC area with the tags missing are older (early 90s) Hondas and Toyotas. I don't know if that's because domestic owners are more careful to properly dispose of their vehicles when they reach the end of their useful life or if it's because those Hondas and Toyotas sold especially well here in the early 90s. (Leaving your junker on the shoulder for the state to deal with certainly is not proper disposal).

I am making the assumption, of course, that someone who would leave their car on the shoulder and take the tags with them doesn't want it anymore, that's where it stopped rolling when it died, and they don't want it anymore because it died. But that seems to me to to be a reasonable assumption.

I have noticed that just 50 miles makes a big difference as to what the common vehicles are.

They have been available on Ford vehicles since 2001 and on GM vehicles since 2002 (that I've been able to confirm, they may have had them earlier).

Buying a used domestic is about the best deal since "perception" and "reality" don't quite match up with them. The "perception" is that they're unreliable junk, the "reality" is...well..take a look at the 2004 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study.

Im in a rural area but live a few miles from Interstate 55 with traffic going to and from Chicago.A short 70 miles away.The burbs are not even 30 miles away.I see all kinds of cars and have to read the name plate to keep up with whats out there.

A friend of mine had a Honda Civic I think it was a Civic way back when we were in High Shool around 1976.It was a new tiny little brown egg shaped car and was a Honda.It started rusting out about a year later and there was nothing left of it a few short years later.I forget now if it rusted away first or if the rubber band broke after winding it to tight?Either way it was junk before it was paid off.

I realise Honda has went a long way since those days.However I do not see many 80's Hondas or Toyotas still on the road.When I go to the burbs.I see plenty of new ones all shiny and bright.Then I see some that are early to mid 90's vintage.Young kids have them.They ussually have a bright neon colored stripe and spinny wheels and a huge chrome tail pipe and a tall spoiler and a box in the back seat full of speakers.Traveling down the streets going BOOM BOOM BOOM.

I remember there was a crase here in my area in the 80's for small Toyota and Datsun before they became Nissan and the Chevy LUV same type truck with the Chevy name before the S-10Ford even had one called the Courier.They were putting wooden beds on them after a few years.Because the original beds rusted away in a short time.Then came the Domestic small truck.The S-10 and Ford Ranger I see them around from there beginning in 1982 still going strong with the original truck bed.

No thanks I will take a Chevy anyday over the so called.Terrific rice burning Yuppie Consumer Reports reading Suburban better lease it because it might not last until its paid for imports made here.If they were cheap maybe I would consider it.But there not because there a status vehical among the Yuppies.Just like the Full size Chevy and Ford pickups and Suv's are popular with the Red Necks.

I forgot to mention.Ever wonder why its not cool to drive an American car.You got to have a cool Honda.But its Cool to drive a Shaking vibrating over priced Harley Davidson.But a Honda motor cycle is not cool?Because its all status and so many think they have to be cool even when there not.It has to have that highest priced sticker price.It depends what the celebrities mostly sport figures are driving.So many want to be like Mike or who ever is Cool this week.

Oh yea, it's real cool to drive a tricked-out Honda that puffs blue smoke every time you accelerate because you were too busy making it look cool to bother changing the oil.

I wonder how cool it is to fail the emissions test, though?

Seen it more than a few times.

Driver death rate and collision loss statistics are a poor measure of a vehicle's safety because they reflect the type of driver who tends to buy a vehicle and a vehicle's size in comparison to other vehicles more than the safety characteristics of the vehicle itself. The crash test results are by far the most significant measure of a vehicle's safety because they are conducted in controlled conditions and are the only valid measure of a vehicle's designed-in crashworthiness.

Check out the crash test results for mid-size cars, right there in the link in rank order. Both the VW Jetta and the Chevy Malibu beat the Camry and Accord.

honda and toyota as status vehicles? on what planet? they just back and forth to work cars. bmw,lexus,cts-v,saab,acura, thats more status cars.

Some of these are on top for theft loss statistics, too.

"Check out the crash test results for mid-size cars, right there in the link in rank order. Both the VW Jetta and the Chevy Malibu beat the Camry and Accord."

Yeah, the VW Jetta JUST debuted. Of course it did better than models that already exist (marginally so) on the market, what would be the point of building a new model if it doesn't excel ahead of its competitors? Oh yeah, and the Malibu, well, it may have got a "best pick" for side crash tests but didn't do as well as the Accord & Camry in frontal testing, where both received a "best pick" unlike the Malibu, strange how you blocked that out. The statement above isn't to say that the new Malibu is an unsafe vehicle; however, most of the GM cars that are testing well are just doing so in their newest redesign. In your reasoning, you're asking me to push back all the other years of not-so-safe vehicles. Sorry, arriving to the party late isn't always fashionable. And all my other points still stand as far as resale value and operating costs, which make the Camry & Accord better buys. As for the Volkswagen, if you can deal with the abysmal reliability, they're fantastic driving machines for the price.

"Driver death rate and collision loss statistics are a poor measure of a vehicle's safety because they reflect the type of driver who tends to buy a vehicle and a vehicle's size in comparison to other vehicles more than the safety characteristics of the vehicle itself."

No, driver death rates aren't invalid if you comparing similar vehicles. It's not illogical to assume that similarly sized, weighted & priced vehicles that are competitors of one another are bought by relatively the same demographic. According to demographics published in the 2000 Road Report, the average age for drivers of the Malibu, Grand Am, Accord, Camry, Sonata, Passat, and Maxima are 47, 47, 49, 53, 44, 51 respectively. With the exception of the Passat and Maxima, the average age seems to fall within range of one another. It's not as if were comparing a Honda Civic to a Cadillac Deville. We're comparing vehicles of similar weight and size.

"A friend of mine had a Honda Civic I think it was a Civic way back when we were in High Shool around 1976.It was a new tiny little brown egg shaped car and was a Honda.It started rusting out about a year later and there was nothing left of it a few short years later.I forget now if it rusted away first or if the rubber band broke after winding it to tight?Either way it was junk before it was paid off."

Oh yeah, a friend of mine had chickens who laid golden eggs and...oh wait, does just saying it make it true? Not that I think you're lying, it's very possible that this situation occurred. Don't you think its a bit on the intellectually retarded side to say that since one Honda owner you knew experienced problems with his Honda, therefore all Hondas are junk? Perhaps you should take Philosophy 101 so you can avoid fallacious arguments in the future.

Wow OAA9898 you called me a lier and a retard in one post LOL.Sure its just one case and I said they make them better today then they did back then.But it is a true story.I guess you just do not believe everything you read.Just every thing Consumer Distorts and JD powers writes?Still its a fact you do not see 20 year old Rice burners on the road.Thats a fact.Maybe up on blocks.Even this retard can see that.

Not that I believe or disbelieve all that I read, it is that one must always consider the source, and read between the lines..
I worked on the early Honda Civic and Accord - they were amazing, BUT, for the long term (ten to twenty years) - I do not know..

Our '88 gave really good service for sixteen years, not perfect, mainly due to incompetent, greedy dealers...It was generally very difficult, almost impossible to work on in many aspects - American cars seem to be much better...

But this is but one car, I'll never live to see the day when one man amasses accurate stats on ten year cars...Very few owners maintain that accurate and factual records, I don't, not all the time...

Right now, I'd guess that the most accurate barometer is the resale value percentages....

But how much of it is really hype? Right now everyone tells me to buy Toyota, that these vehicles will last forever. My current vehicle is a Toyota, and it's lasted me 9 years. I've had to take it in for some minor repairs, but overall it's been very reliable. Is it luck or is it really the Toyota brand?

But I can't say the same for the Toyota repair places ... that's an entirely different experience. Bunch of lying, thieving, unscrupulous jackasses. Sure wish we could walk in armed with our lawyers. um, you said my what needs fixing??? ... hold on, let me talk to my lawyer. ;-)

"Wow OAA9898 you called me a lier and a retard in one post LOL.Sure its just one case and I said they make them better today then they did back then.But it is a true story.I guess you just do not believe everything you read.Just every thing Consumer Distorts and JD powers writes?Still its a fact you do not see 20 year old Rice burners on the road.Thats a fact.Maybe up on blocks.Even this retard can see that."

Actually they did make them good, even back then. Why do you think the imports were so popular? American cars in the '70s were gas hogs of substandard quality. All cars built back then were of abysmal quality in comparison to todays cars. I'm not suggesting imports were perfect at all; however, every car in the 70s had rust problems. The problem with imports back then was that very few mechanics would touch them, so dealer maintenance was necessary and expensive (and therefore often left undone). Guess what happens if you don't change the timing belt on an interference engine? It snaps and the pistons hit the valves, and well, you can guess the rest. If your car has over a 100,000 miles on it, and the engine is ruined due to a snapped timing belt (due to poor maintenance) you could put a couple thousand dollars into an eight or nine year old car, or cut your losses. What choice do you think a lot of consumers made? BTW, in 1985, Honda and Toyota sales were growing but were far from being at the volume of domestic cars sold at the time. Of course you see more domestics; thats simply due to the fact that more domestics were sold. Japanese car companies concentrated their sales in markets were demand was the highest, like on the West coast. You live in Illinois, the demand for gasoline was and is much higher in California, and probably always will be; therefore, there was a greater demand for fuel-efficient vehicles. Hence, more Hondas and Toyotas were sold there as opposed to where you and I live, the Midwest. Despite what you may believe, everything is not the same everywhere, johndeere. And thanks to competition cars today are far better then they would be without Japanese Imports. Thanks, Japan.

Don't knock Consumer Reports. Unlike J.D. Power & Associates, they are one of the only non-for-profit consumer advocacy groups left in the country. They accept no advertisements, corporate donations, and don't allow their name to be advertised by manufacturers. Say what you will, that they're biased towards foreign cars, or other garbage like that - but it will be completely unfounded.

"But how much of it is really hype? Right now everyone tells me to buy Toyota, that these vehicles will last forever. My current vehicle is a Toyota, and it's lasted me 9 years. I've had to take it in for some minor repairs, but overall it's been very reliable. Is it luck or is it really the Toyota brand?"

It's the odds, Zofie. It is very true that you could buy an American make and have it be just as, if not more reliable than any Toyota. Simply put, your odds of buying a reliable Japanese car are higher than buying a domestic make. Would you rather spend your hard-earned dollar on a car from the most reliable manufacturer in the industry or the fourth, fifth, or eight?

Zofie, the Toyota dealer is in the process of killing the golden egg laying goose as are many others (VW,Honda, even Saab)...
Try to find a good dealer of any American brand or , better yet, buy privately...
But, as good as Honda or Toyota MAY be, I would stay away from them.
Buy American
Never thought I, who has never bought American, would ever say this...And I will never deal with American thieves either....

myself i dont care who makes them, i find them all to be a major expense, and a big pain in the a$$. and i cant wait for somone to design a "star trek" like transporter, so i can get rid of my stinking vehicles, and never set behind the wheel again!