The Avalon does have a few goodies that the Camry doesn't get such as HIDs and Dynamic Laser Cruise Control. But then the Camry has a bigger trunk.

 

than 12k yaris? Yep. :-).
It is really true, simpler cars simply have less things to possibly break. There are always TSBs after vehicle starts selling, and it is good that these things are taken care of immedialtly.

I would be worried about there being no TSB's, heh.

Toyota does have to be really carefull about new models they do, since now they can design and sell vehicle within 18months, which really shortens the time for troubleshooting.

 

Big Cars, w/out Side Curtain Airbags get Poor Rating
With cars getting safer, more people in new cars die from side hits than front crashes.
June 18, 2006; Posted: 10:47 p.m. EDT (0247 GMT)
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - With better crash safety engineered into passenger vehicles and front airbags now required equipment, side impacts account for more driver deaths than frontal impacts in newer cars, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Today's cars routinely get top scores in front crash tests performed by both the federal government and the private Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Some big sedans performed poorly, though, in a recent round of side impact tests by the Institute.

The Insurance Institute's side impact test is different from that performed by the federal government's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The Institute's test is designed to mimic the impact of a pickup or SUV into the side of the car. Because the point of impact is higher on the door, it is virtually impossible for a vehicle to do well in the Institute's side impact test unless it is equipped with airbags designed to protect occupants' heads.

When tested without optional side airbags installed, the Ford Five Hundred, Ford Crown Victoria and Chrysler 300 all earned ratings of "Poor" in the Institute's side impact tests.

The Ford Five Hundred earned the best possible rating of "Good" and was named a Gold Top Safety Pick by the Insurance Institute for overall crash safety when tested with the side impact airbags installed, however. All crash test results for the Five Hundred also apply to the Mercury Montego, a nearly identical car.

Side airbags will be installed as standard equipment on the Five Hundred and Montego beginning in September, Ford has said.

Ford also said it is making design changes to better protect occupants of the Crown Victoria and has asked the Institute to test a version of the car with optional side airbags installed. Results from the Institute's tests on the Crown Victoria also apply to the nearly identical Mercury Grand Marquis.

The Chrysler 300, with its optional side impact airbags installed, earned only a "Marginal" rating, one better than "Poor," for side impact safety. All crash test results for the Chrysler 300 also apply to the Dodge Charger.

The Chevrolet Impala and Toyota Avalon both earned the Institute's top rating of "Good" for side impact safety. Both have standard head-protecting side impact airbags.

The Buick Lucerne earned a rating of "Acceptable," the second-best of four possible ratings. Results for the Lucerne also apply to the Cadillac DTS. The Hyundai Azera also earned a rating of "Acceptable."

The smaller Buick LaCrosse earned a rating of "Marginal." The Lacrosse's results also apply to the Pontiac Grand Prix.

Overall, side impacts are the second most deadly type of crash after frontal impacts. Side impact crashes killed 9,700 people in the year 2004. In new cars from model years later than 2000, 51 percent of driver deaths occur in cars struck from the side compared to 44 percent in cars struck from the front.

Results from the most recent round of side impact test on large sedans

Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

* Chevrolet Impala: Good

with standard side airbags

* Toyota Avalon: Good

with standard side airbags

* Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego: Good

with optional head curtain and front torso side airbags

* Buick Lucerne/Cadillac DTS: Acceptable

with standard head curtain and front torso side airbags

* Hyundai Azera: Acceptable

with standard head curtain airbags and front and rear torso side airbags

* Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger: Marginal

with optional head curtain side airbags

* Buick LaCrosse/Pontiac Grand Prix: Marginal

with head curtain airbags (may be optional)

* Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego: Poor

without optional side airbags

* Ford Crown Victoria/Mercury Grand Marquis: Poor

without optional side airbags

Results for cars not included in the most recent round of side impact tests can be found at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's Website at iihs.org. (This link will take you to a Website outside of CNN.com. The link will open in a new window.)

Results for National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's crash tests can be found at safercar.gov.

 

Sad to say that our Avalon has developed the infamous transmission hesitation/stutter/lurch. The same old problem all those ES330 owners seem to encounter. It doesn't bother us much, as it never really ocurrs unless we are doing 20mph in traffic on the highway and there is a need to constantly feather the gas pedal. This is the only real time its noticeable. As far as I'm concerned there is no problem, as whenever I drive the vehicle it is always in manual shift mode. So if I'm in traffic, I just leave it in 2 and then there is no hesitation. If its in D, it feels like its slipping as the RPM will climb to around 2500 before the gear engages fully and then will drop to 1200. My father and I are agressive at the wheel so even in D, neither of us really notice it because we hit the pedal hard enough to get the car to downshift and experience that usual atuo tranny lag. Also my mother is not smart enough about cars to notice the hesitation when she drives.


We're OK as long as it doesn't get any worse.

 

Wrong......the Avalon, in complexity, can't hold a candle to the Land Cruiser.
And this guy is a TOYOTA rep ?

 

Yep. I, for one, think the short product development cycles are to blame. Sure every part can be concieved and built on computer to operate at theoretical specs - but when you put all those parts together and add the manufacturing variation or some other unforeseen compatibility problem - you get QC nightmare. Especially when the cars aren't adequately tested and revised before deployed/launched.

This just goes to show that engineering more and more complex cars in shorter and shorter time periods doesn't make much sense.

M.

 

The Landcruiser may be mechanically complex, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Avalon has more computers and software.

 

The Avalon and LC are both luxo-barges, but the Avalon has more stuff to make you comfortable while the LC is built for offroad endurance.

 

Maybe.....hard to say. Obviously, I haven't sat down and counted the total number of individual parts in each vehicle, but the Land Cruiser has a far more complex drive train and suspension.

 

true, but it is all in how you design it. When Toyota got 2002 Corolla out, we had gazillion small issues.
New Rav4 comes out, and we had one small issue that got fixed before car started selling and after 6 months no true TSB's. And Rav4 probably took at least one year less to design and had a lot smaller budget than Corolla.

It is also using new engines, new platform, unlike 2002 Corolla.

So it all really depends on how good initial engineering is and how much care is taken to troubleshooting.
I think 2000-2005 will be left known as dark years for Toyota quality.