3 ms·

>share more or less 1:1 with Toyota, customers who who put very easy miles on vehicles Like all the Toyota trucks used in military operations around the world?

>share more or less 1:1 with Toyota, customers who who put very easy miles on vehicles Like all the Toyota trucks used in military operations around the world? Those kind of "easy miles"? Comparing these two companies, with vastly different scales of operation, is kind of silly.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
<rolls eyes> The edge between manufacturers in any given measurable attribute of vehicle performance is far, far smaller than a bunch of screeching fanboys on the internet would have you believe. If it weren't you'd see far less diversity of vehicles on the road. The humvee is also used by militaries all around the world. It's not known for particularly great reliability. Militaries have a much difference set of objectives when it comes to labor vs supply chain complexity vs cost than civilian entities and individuals do. Poor countries in Africa and the middle east use Toyotas a lot for the same reason they still use 7.62 intermediate cartridges a lot. It's what they have, it's what their supply chains are tuned for. It does the job they need, not necessarily with maximal efficiency but well enough they can't justify the cost of switching. Meanwhile in the civilian market Toyotas cost more, don't do good incentives/rebates and financing is more limited. This drives people on a budget to other brands. This means Toyotas wind up in the hands of people who treat them proportionally nicer. A Tacoma rolls off the lot and into an upscale garage. A Colorado rolls off the dealer lot and into a commercial fleet where it will be driven by a bunch of people who aren't paid enough to care. A Camry will have one ass in one seat for the first 100k and it will go from home to work and home to work. An Altima will spend its first 100k dragging a family of four all of the places they need to go. A Sienna's first owner will go to home Depot, buy 3000lb of pavers and rent the truck to drive it home. A Town and Country's first owner will put that in the van without thinking twice. See what I'm getting at here? Being expensive up front means that only people who can afford to be nice to things get their hands on them, at least initially, that means the vehicles rack up more miles and years before they see hard use. Any vehicle not fundamentally flawed to begin with can look reliable in the hands of these people. I can present other examples of this if Toyota is too emotional of a topic for people to discuss. Also it should go without saying that we're talking in broad generalizations here. I do agree with you that the scale difference between Tesla and Toyota is massive and comparison between them is silly.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  While there might be a slight effect of Toyotas being used less intensively because disproportionally higher income people buy them, I doubt it is a material effect. The people that are not going to put pavers in their car because they can afford not to and want to keep it nice are buying Denali Yukons or other more expensive, luxury vehicles. Toyota did not start expensive, and even now it is not the most expensive ($/mile). They earned that reputation over many years, and while they may have raised prices, the resale market does not show any evidence of the quality slipping.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    >While there might be a slight effect of Toyotas being used less intensively because disproportionally higher income people buy them, I doubt it is a material effect. It is a very massive material effect. >The people that are not going to put pavers in their car because they can afford not to and want to keep it nice are buying Denali Yukons or other more expensive, luxury vehicles. That's exactly the point. Look at how the Eddie Baur trim 90s Fords SUVs were/are over-represented on the used market for a very long time. They didn't get rode hard and put away wet like the lower trim ones. Look at the market for used GM sedans. The Caddys are pretty much always in better shape at a given age than their downmarket equivalents. The difference is that Toyota, because of their unwillingness to readily offer good financing and incentives (driving up the effective "out the door" cost) ensures that the buyers of their vehicles are wealthier than those of comparable brands. Even at low price points this holds. You don't see a lot of Echos and Yaris's street parked in low rent neighborhoods whereas the Soul, Sentra and Focus are staples. Other brands have the same effect going on (Volvo is a good example) but Toyota's is massive and they lean into it much more than anyone else. >Toyota did not start expensive, It has always been expensive, at least as far back as the 80s. Compare MSRPs to comparable cars from the domestics. >the resale market does not show any evidence of the quality slipping. The market is based on consumer perceptions that are driven mostly by out of doubt hearsay. It is unwise to trust the market to show much of anything.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

<rolls eyes> The edge between manufacturers in any given measurable attribute of vehicle performance is far, far smaller than a bunch of screeching fanboys on the internet would have you believe. If it weren't you'd see far less diversity of vehicles on the road. The humvee is also used by militaries all around the world. It's not known for particularly great reliability. Militaries have a much difference set of objectives when it comes to labor vs supply chain complexity vs cost than civilian entities and individuals do. Poor countries in Africa and the middle east use Toyotas a lot for the same reason they still use 7.62 intermediate cartridges a lot. It's what they have, it's what their supply chains are tuned for. It does the job they need, not necessarily with maximal efficiency but well enough they can't justify the cost of switching. Meanwhile in the civilian market Toyotas cost more, don't do good incentives/rebates and financing is more limited. This drives people on a budget to other brands. This means Toyotas wind up in the hands of people who treat them proportionally nicer. A Tacoma rolls off the lot and into an upscale garage. A Colorado rolls off the dealer lot and into a commercial fleet where it will be driven by a bunch of people who aren't paid enough to care. A Camry will have one ass in one seat for the first 100k and it will go from home to work and home to work. An Altima will spend its first 100k dragging a family of four all of the places they need to go. A Sienna's first owner will go to home Depot, buy 3000lb of pavers and rent the truck to drive it home. A Town and Country's first owner will put that in the van without thinking twice. See what I'm getting at here? Being expensive up front means that only people who can afford to be nice to things get their hands on them, at least initially, that means the vehicles rack up more miles and years before they see hard use. Any vehicle not fundamentally flawed to begin with can look reliable in the hands of these people. I can present other examples of this if Toyota is too emotional of a topic for people to discuss. Also it should go without saying that we're talking in broad generalizations here. I do agree with you that the scale difference between Tesla and Toyota is massive and comparison between them is silly.

lotsofpulp 5y ago
While there might be a slight effect of Toyotas being used less intensively because disproportionally higher income people buy them, I doubt it is a material effect. The people that are not going to put pavers in their car because they can afford not to and want to keep it nice are buying Denali Yukons or other more expensive, luxury vehicles. Toyota did not start expensive, and even now it is not the most expensive ($/mile). They earned that reputation over many years, and while they may have raised prices, the resale market does not show any evidence of the quality slipping.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >While there might be a slight effect of Toyotas being used less intensively because disproportionally higher income people buy them, I doubt it is a material effect. It is a very massive material effect. >The people that are not going to put pavers in their car because they can afford not to and want to keep it nice are buying Denali Yukons or other more expensive, luxury vehicles. That's exactly the point. Look at how the Eddie Baur trim 90s Fords SUVs were/are over-represented on the used market for a very long time. They didn't get rode hard and put away wet like the lower trim ones. Look at the market for used GM sedans. The Caddys are pretty much always in better shape at a given age than their downmarket equivalents. The difference is that Toyota, because of their unwillingness to readily offer good financing and incentives (driving up the effective "out the door" cost) ensures that the buyers of their vehicles are wealthier than those of comparable brands. Even at low price points this holds. You don't see a lot of Echos and Yaris's street parked in low rent neighborhoods whereas the Soul, Sentra and Focus are staples. Other brands have the same effect going on (Volvo is a good example) but Toyota's is massive and they lean into it much more than anyone else. >Toyota did not start expensive, It has always been expensive, at least as far back as the 80s. Compare MSRPs to comparable cars from the domestics. >the resale market does not show any evidence of the quality slipping. The market is based on consumer perceptions that are driven mostly by out of doubt hearsay. It is unwise to trust the market to show much of anything.