Toyota Now Considering Steering Recall

[RShrimp]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100217/ap_on_bi_ge/toyota_recall

The statement that made me post this.

"Sasaki said drivers may feel as though they were losing control over the steering, but it was unclear why."

Do Corolla's have electric DPS?????? Same vendor??????
I hope so as this will get solved right quick if the above answers are "Yes"

[M2Wild]

Same vendor??????
Ha ha ... I was wondering if they sourced from the same place too.:dontknow:

[RAL]

or do the feds seem to be making a bigger deal of this than in past recalls? Seems to me that the Gov involvment in GM and Mopar may create a conflict of interest. GM and Mopar stand to profit greatly from Toyota's woes. :dontknow:


RAL

[RShrimp]

I appears that I have answered my own first question.

http://www.toyotarecall.org/20100209-toyota-corolla-electric-power-steering-recall-possible/

Yes, They do have EPS ....

[RoadHammer]

It's going to be a great time to buy a toyota soon:doorag:

[bjt]

Is it just me.... or do the feds seem to be making a bigger deal of this than in past recalls? Seems to me that the Gov involvment in GM and Mopar may create a conflict of interest. GM and Mopar stand to profit greatly from Toyota's woes. :dontknow:


RAL


Just like Toyota profitted from the government's involvement in GM and Chrysler last year.... Those two lost a significant amount of customers because people didn't want to do business with a company that had to rely on government help. Toyota was a beneficiary of that, right along with the other foreign automakers. I believe that they outsold U.S. made cars during the "Cash for Clunkers" program also.

I've heard that Japan is already claiming that the U.S. government is doing this to conspire to drive down the Asian automakers popularity in the U.S. :dontknow:

IMO, it seems like a similar situation to what GM, Chrysler and Ford were facing when they were initially asking the government for some type of loans. They were scrutinized under a microscope for every inefficiency they had while banks just opened up their wallets and the government was throwing money at them, hardly any questions asked. Ford decided to ride it out on their own while GM and Chrysler were too far gone and had to depend on the government aid (and get stuck with the government oversight).

[Firefly]

Yeah--- I thought it was a mistake for the one bozo from the US Gov. to make the statement about 'don't drive them' (referring to toyota). Just doesn't look right considering the current situation our government is in with the US auto industry.

Props to Ford for riding this out on their own. Now if they would just make a vehicle that I like......:dontknow:

[NancysToy]

I've heard that Japan is already claiming that the U.S. government is doing this to conspire to drive down the Asian automakers popularity in the U.S. :dontknow:
It may be a back door tariff, but it may work just as well. We need to keep some jobs over here, and keep the profits here, too. JMHO

[RAL]

People are not happy with the GOV take over of these auto makers so they don't buy from them. GM was in a pickle of its own making, largly due to the unions who now own part of the PIE....what a bunch of crap!!! A smear campain about a COMPETITOR is quite another thing, its not tit for tat. I find it troubling that the feds may be using their power to hurt a company, foreign owned or not.
Personaly I think the American car buyer owes Toyota, Honda and Nisson some degree of gratatuted whether you drive one or not. Most on here are old enough to remember the awful crap that was put out by GM , Mopar and Ford in the 70s. A 100,000 mile rig was pretty much used up...scrap and you did not get that far without MAJOR repairs. They were forced by the quality of Japanese COMPETITORS to make a better product.
Free market competion....what a concept.
I tried to buy only american. Finally got tired of dealing with all the phantoms and gremlins in the us vehicals we owned at the time ( STBTCB...shutting the lights off while going around a 55 mph corner out in the sticks with no moon light:yikes:) When I broke down and bought a Toyota I dicovered the Ford we traded in was made in Mexico City, the Toyota was made in the USA. The point is I do not owe a company anything just because it is "domestic". I prefere to buy US goods and do buy what I can. I am willing to pay more for products made here but I will not buy overpriced crap. (no comments from disgruntled Spyder owners):sour:
At anyrate the US Gov has no business in the car business. It was and still should be sink or swim. Ask Rambler, Hudson, Studabaker..........they went bust and somehow the country carried on.
Stepping off the soapbox, I am rambling.


RAL

[Firefly]

My last two vehicles I bought were from the Big 3.

One was made in Canada, the other in Mexico. :mad::gaah:

[Smylinacha]

I can't find it now but at one time I found it either in here or on the net but aren't our dps's made by a company that begins with the letter K?

[Firefly]

I can't find it now but at one time I found it either in here or on the net but aren't our dps's made by a company that begins with the letter K?

K-mart? :roflblack:

[bjt]

People are not happy with the GOV take over of these auto makers so they don't buy from them. GM was in a pickle of its own making, largly due to the unions who now own part of the PIE....what a bunch of crap!!!

GM was in a pickle due to GM corporate. Union labor is a minute cost in the building of a vehicle. Who ever heard of a company throwing out brand new equipment, tools, spare parts and supplies when changing over from one product to another? A few years ago, GM was throwing away millions alone in tools that were perfectly servicable and people would gladly use them. Instead they had security guards monitor the employees to be sure they were throwing all the tools (for example, hundreds of brand new in the box 18V DeWalt cordless drills), welders, drill presses, etc. in scrap gondolas to be destroyed. Or how about GM buying up smaller companies for hundreds of millions and selling them a few years down the road for tens of millions (and losing money in the venture every year since they bought it). The list goes on.

Corporate waste is much greater than union costs in GM and I imagine it's the same in Ford, Chrysler and many other large companies. If the union had their preference, I doubt they would want to be a part owner of GM. They would rather have the money that GM bargained in the 2007 labor contract that would fund the retirement benefit package (VEBA) that the union agreed to take on (it was GM's responsibility before).



A smear campain about a COMPETITOR is quite another thing, its not tit for tat. I find it troubling that the feds may be using their power to hurt a company, foreign owned or not.

It is just speculation that the government is intentionally trying to hurt Toyota. How many people would you like to see hurt or killed due to Toyota's bad brakes, sticking accelerator (both confirmed issues) or steering glitch? There is a thought that a Spyder steering glitch may have caused the death of a few Spyder riders and some here have been shouting that the government should make BRP take them off the road...


Personaly I think the American car buyer owes Toyota, Honda and Nisson some degree of gratatuted whether you drive one or not. Most on here are old enough to remember the awful crap that was put out by GM , Mopar and Ford in the 70s. A 100,000 mile rig was pretty much used up...scrap and you did not get that far without MAJOR repairs. They were forced by the quality of Japanese COMPETITORS to make a better product.

As I recall, Toyata had their pieces of crap (cars rusting out prematurely) back in the 70's too.



...I prefer to buy US goods and do buy what I can. I am willing to pay more for products made here but I will not buy overpriced crap. (no comments from disgruntled Spyder owners):sour:
At anyrate the US Gov has no business in the car business. It was and still should be sink or swim. Ask Rambler, Hudson, Studabaker..........they went bust and somehow the country carried on.
Stepping off the soapbox, I am rambling.


RAL

I agree that the government shouldn't be in the car business. However, I don't know that them standing by and watching hundreds of thousands of people lose their jobs in one felled swoop was a good option either.

[Questions]

As I recall, Toyata had their pieces of crap (cars rusting out prematurely) back in the 70's too.




yeah, everybody remembers the flimsy sheet metal they used and the rust bleeding through.....and chrome that flaked off....we had some winners here too....the Pinto, the Vega......my dad actually bought a Vega to use for work travel....had it for 8 years....used paint stripe yellow paint and a brush on it later as it rusted out....yes, we produced some real gems...:roflblack:

[bjt]

yeah, everybody remembers the flimsy sheet metal they used and the rust bleeding through.....and chrome that flaked off....we had some winners here too....the Pinto, the Vega......my dad actually bought a Vega to use for work travel....had it for 8 years....used paint stripe yellow paint and a brush on it later as it rusted out....yes, we produced some real gems...:roflblack:

GM's back to using flimsy sheet metal but the paint process and water leak prevention is much better so the vehicles finish lasts quite a bit longer than it used to.

[NancysToy]

GM's back to using flimsy sheet metal but the paint process and water leak prevention is much better so the vehicles finish lasts quite a bit longer than it used to.
Not to mention the use of weld-through primers, and other rust preventative measures. Todays' vehicles make my 78 GMC van (first new vehicle) look sick by comparison!

[RAL]

GM was in a pickle due to GM corporate. Union labor is a minute cost in the building of a vehicle. Who ever heard of a company throwing out brand new equipment, tools, spare parts and supplies when changing over from one product to another? A few years ago, GM was throwing away millions alone in tools that were perfectly servicable and people would gladly use them. Instead they had security guards monitor the employees to be sure they were throwing all the tools (for example, hundreds of brand new in the box 18V DeWalt cordless drills), welders, drill presses, etc. in scrap gondolas to be destroyed. Or how about GM buying up smaller companies for hundreds of millions and selling them a few years down the road for tens of millions (and losing money in the venture every year since they bought it). The list goes on.

Corporate waste is much greater than union costs in GM and I imagine it's the same in Ford, Chrysler and many other large companies. If the union had their preference, I doubt they would want to be a part owner of GM. They would rather have the money that GM bargained in the 2007 labor contract that would fund the retirement benefit package (VEBA) that the union agreed to take on (it was GM's responsibility before).



BJT I have no doubt that what you are saying about GM CORP is true. As to what organization would operate in such a wastefull manner....look no farther than the Gov. They are now in the drivers seat, great. Examples of this kind of nonsence are LEGION in Gov run programs IE the military. Here is one tiny example of union waste. GM was forced by the union to keep paying full wages and benefits to workers that had been working on the delco end even after they where not making the parts. These guys showed up to work everyday,went to the break room and spent their time reading newspapers or staring at walls. This went on for years!!!!!!!!
My money says you are a union man. My dad was too. Unions had their place at one time but they have grown into something else. I have been in unions at different times throughout my working life and could go on for quite a long time here about the insanity of union work. Of the unions I have worked in they all had one thing in common, produtivity was not high on the list of priorities. As a skinny 130 lb. laborer at the age of 20 I was told by a 250lb + co worker to stop carrying two pieces of plywood at one time, YOU ARE PUTTING A BROTHER OUT OF WORK!!! This was a threat with the alternative clear, an ass wupping later in the parking lot. They were paying me a lot of money and foolish me thought I was expected to work for it. Or how about the time the diving company I worked for went out to California to do a job because the local companys did not have the capability to perform the work at that time, mixed gas diving to 250' to make a emergency repair of a dam gate in Lake Sonoma. When we got there a group of men had gathered on the road by the boat launch, they did not look happy. A big fancy car showed up with a union boss who produced papers for us to sign. Our company had paid the union for us to join, with the ransom paid and the stroke of a pen we were all good union men. The real union guys were not happy
This was a day light operation working off a flexy float barge. We set up and went to work diving with out any problems. The next day bright and early we are back at it. As the first diver of the day was approching the end of his bottomtime the hot water machine started acting up. He now had lost hot water with an in water deco obligation of almost 100 min before he would be able to come up and get in the chamber to finish his deco.
It got to the point he was in real trouble, thanking us for fixing the unit as he was warm now, the unit was still not fixed. We got him up and in the can and he had to spend extra time in the chamber because of the ordeal. What does this have to do with the union...........the scores of holes that had somehow showed up overnight in the brand new suction hose. They were like ice pick holes. Hard to see causing the pump to such air when a load was put on and loose prime.
I could go on for hours. I was raised to believe unions were good, my working experiencehowever has shown otherwise. Workers deserve a good wage and a safe work place. The employer deserves a days work for the money he pays.......the balance has been lost long ago.
I do not need or want a pimp to get my work for me or strong arm those who might be in competition for my spot. I was raised a little different than that by an old union man. Yes I have an attitude about unions:dontknow:




It is just speculation that the government is intentionally trying to hurt Toyota. How many people would you like to see hurt or killed due to Toyota's bad brakes, sticking accelerator (both confirmed issues) or steering glitch? There is a thought that a Spyder steering glitch may have caused the death of a few Spyder riders and some here have been shouting that the government should make BRP take them off the road...




No body says Toyotas problems should not be looked into. Maybe they are not pushing harder on them than they would Ford, just looks that way to me. The Gov has its fingers where they should not be and shouts conflict of interest.



As I recall, Toyata had their pieces of crap (cars rusting out prematurely) back in the 70's too.



My buddy had an old Toyota PU that rusted like crazy. It looked like hell but was still running like a champ when he got rid of it at 350,000+, with no major repairs. The Japanese forced the US car maker to make a better product. Surely you don't think it was the unions:roflblack:



I agree that the government shouldn't be in the car business. However, I don't know that them standing by and watching hundreds of thousands of people lose their jobs in one felled swoop was a good option either.[/QUOTE]

As to the loss of jobs.
You can pay now or you can pay later..more. We are only putting things off and I fear the country will pay a much higher price.



RAL

[Firefly]

While I agree the Japanese made the US auto companies increase their quality, I don't think one can pin the current economic state of the big 3 entirely on the unions.

Certainly many unions have abused things, and I don't doubt your examples are true - but judging them all because of such things isn't really fair.

Unions greatly increased the standard of living for the average American - perhaps more than anything in our history to date. Non-union companies had to pay competitive wages and have decent retirement, health, etc. to compete with the union shops.

My town here in Michigan has a mix of both Union and non-Union workers - much of it in the automotive industry. The Japanese companies tend to be non-union and pay decent wages with good benefits. If unions did not exist, I have no doubt those wages and benefits would not be as good.

The big problem in my opinion has been the outright greed by the big wigs and board members of these corporations. It's not good enough that they were making money--- they needed to make MORE money and decided to outsource to cheap labor countries to make that money.

All of these companies now care about growth more than anything--- not a good business model in my opinion. They should be happy making profits every year-- but good ol' American greed got in the way.

Our government doesn't want to be in the auto industry, and they really aren't-- they simply hold stock now as a guarantee they'll get something for the loaned money. They would just as soon sell the stock off and get their money back. I saw this as a much smarter move than just giving the money away without any strings attached (like the original banker bailout that was done by the previous administration).

Hopefully things will work out in the end. The Big 3 need to listen to the American public on what we want in cars--- not wait for the Japanese to beat them to the punch like they did in the 70's. It's really the exact same scenario again. Everyone wants higher MPG cars--- and so far the Japanese are the leaders in bringing them to market.

I personally want a SUV or minivan that works like the new volt... first 100 miles are on batteries that you can plug and charge at home or work..... anything over 100 miles and a generator kicks on to supply the power to the all-electric drivetrain.

100 miles a day would cover what most Americans drive, thus reducing gas consumption quite a bit.

[bjt]

RAL, I work in a union facility but I'm not a "union man". I too agree with your negative examples of union labor / leadership. I am appalled by the bad union workers and how they are protected by our union. However, those people are probably less than 5 - 10% of our total workforce. I do take exception to people saying that 100% of the union is bad when, in reality, most of the people work hard, do a good job and are a benefit to the company.

The example you cited about Delco workers is something that the company originally wanted as much as the union wanted it. Instead of hiring a bunch of new workers for the cyclical nature of the business back then, they decided to try and keep the people who were trained and able to work in those conditions (not everyone can or wants to do assembly line work). It has outlived it's purpose though and it was finally stopped last year.

I also think it screams of "the blind leading the blind" to have the government involved in deciding on a companies inefficiencies and wasteful spending. They gave out $700 billion just last year and don't know where it all went or if it was used properly.... :dontknow:

I agree with you on most of your points except for the initial statement that the unions are the biggest problem with the state of GM, Chrysler or the country. Like Firefly said, unions have propped up many other industries wages. I believe if unions were gone, you would see companies racing to see how low they could get the wages. Then we'd be relying on the government and their minimum wage laws to keep the majority of Americans at or just above the poverty level.

2009 Health and Human Services poverty guideline, $10,830 for one person. Minimum wage ($7.25 / hr.) times 39 hours per week (so a company can skirt any other obligations afforded full-time employees) times 52 weeks is $14,703. Definitely not the standard I want anyone to settle for.

[Firefly]

http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/home.aspx

[RAL]

RAL, I work in a union facility but I'm not a "union man". I too agree with your negative examples of union labor / leadership. I am appalled by the bad union workers and how they are protected by our union. However, those people are probably less than 5 - 10% of our total workforce. I do take exception to people saying that 100% of the union is bad when, in reality, most of the people work hard, do a good job and are a benefit to the company.

The example you cited about Delco workers is something that the company originally wanted as much as the union wanted it. Instead of hiring a bunch of new workers for the cyclical nature of the business back then, they decided to try and keep the people who were trained and able to work in those conditions (not everyone can or wants to do assembly line work). It has outlived it's purpose though and it was finally stopped last year.

I also think it screams of "the blind leading the blind" to have the government involved in deciding on a companies inefficiencies and wasteful spending. They gave out $700 billion just last year and don't know where it all went or if it was used properly.... :dontknow:

I agree with you on most of your points except for the initial statement that the unions are the biggest problem with the state of GM, Chrysler or the country. Like Firefly said, unions have propped up many other industries wages. I believe if unions were gone, you would see companies racing to see how low they could get the wages. Then we'd be relying on the government and their minimum wage laws to keep the majority of Americans at or just above the poverty level.

2009 Health and Human Services poverty guideline, $10,830 for one person. Minimum wage ($7.25 / hr.) times 39 hours per week (so a company can skirt any other obligations afforded full-time employees) times 52 weeks is $14,703. Definitely not the standard I want anyone to settle for.

I know there are many good hard working union members and I am sorry as to my post not pointing that out. As to who is most responsible..I am sure there is enough feeding at both ends of the trough to cause great harm.
I find it interesting that the US Toyota worker actually makes more than the union auto worker and yet they easily compete and arguably make a superior product. I believe it has to do with pride and having to produce to keep your job.
As far as the companys moving overseas to cheaper labor forces I find it disturbing but very understandable. A business exists to make a profit, no profit you're done. Would you as an employer put up with a labor force that is always aggressively pushing for more and more while forcing you to keep some mediocre employees or would you jump at the chance to use a cheaper force that is not always taking you back to the table?
I think the unions need to change a bit if they are to survive. The company needs to be able to fire the dead wood without going though a gauntlet of insanity. I realize that the protection offered the members is not without merit but why protect the lazy.
I am not without sympathy for the good workers but am angered by the bailout and the unions profitting from it. The Blue oval turned it down and one of their trucks sits in my driveway and likely always will.
I apologize for some of my harsher comments but I am greatly disturbed by the state of things. I have lived a good life with many opportunities laid at my feet as a young man. It saddens and shames me to be part of the generation that will leave a world of less opportunity to my grandchildren. I do feel the unions are resposible for a large share of it and on that point we will have to agree to disagree.


RAL

[Smylinacha]

Yeah.... "Moving Forward"...... Erratically


It's going to be a great time to buy a toyota soon:doorag: