They're not saying that it's illegal to drive 85mph or even that their cars can't drive 85mph. They're saying not to drive over 85mph unless the tires are rated for high speed, which they were and the guy's tires never failed. It's just a bunch of nonsense.
Welcome to Toyota. More concerned with their corporate image than actually making good, safe cars. They spend billions making you think their cars are the best. People have completely bought into it.
Regardless of the speed limit, car owners need to know the tire speed rating and drive accordingly. Note that the ratings are fairly conservative - esp. for short periods of speed over the rating. If a speed limit is 85, what speed do people typically drive? Seems to me that most cars are sold with T or H speed tires - over 100 mph (118 and 130 mph)
The stock tires are Michelin Pilot Sport 4s, which are “Y” rated for 186 MPH… 100 MPH over 85. Furthermore, included with every new purchase of the GR Corolla is a free track day. This car is meant to be driven fast. And this model has only been around since 2023. If this guy lawyers up, I have no doubt this would be a slam dunk case.
What a great (devious) ploy by Toyota: give buyers a free track day so they almost immediately void their warranty. "Nothing in our offer of a free track day encouraged driving above 85mph."
It's so wacky to even think about because you could literally cruise at 90 mph and do less damage than launching it and bouncing off the rev limiter but never go above 60
I don't think we have all the information. He mentioned the car was just in for service, so did the service center forget to do something, i.e. fill the engine back up with oil.
@@VaporheadATC What info could we be missing? "He mentioned the car was just in for service, so did the service center forget to do something, i.e. fill the engine back up with oil." Then Toyota would have said that. Instead they said you need to make sure you have the right tires for going over 85.
This is nothing new for them. There was a class action in the late 2000s/early 2010s about their cars accelerating uncontrollably that revealed that they know their cars are junk and full of flaws but they are trying to keep the image of safe, reliable, and no recalls so even if they're is a known defect they won't recall it and just let it happen over and over again at the owners expense and if the owner wants a permanent fix they will try to force them to die individually.
@@sypothwas that not more or less user error? I had one friend use the Toyota accelerating on its own defense in traffic court. He got his speeding ticket thrown out with a less than truthful mechanic report about this issue on his car as evidence.
@@AlGoYoSu I don't know about the Toyota issue, but the issue with Audis a few years before was definitely found to be user error. In virtually every case, the Audi was the driver's first European car. At the time Audi used the same pedal cluster for automatic and manual cars (they just omitted the clutch pedal on automatic cars), and their pedals were set up for heel and toe downshifting, so the throttle and brake were closer together than many drivers of American cars were used to. They just stepped on the wrong pedal :-(.
Look this is one incident of a very popular car company. I am sure once it is all said and done this person will have a settlement based on what is provided. Right now there is probably 20 or so of those engines doing over 85 mph every second of every day in just say Texas. This is super conservative the customer service may be slipping but they get their share of scammers!
@@PigglyWigglyDeluxe Yea, that's because he went on a track and blew up his engine. That's not a mechanical issue if you made the mistake! I believe cars have black boxes just like airplanes do. If this guy did something he wasn't supposed to, they would be saying that and not this nonsense.
It's comical that they work so hard to sell you an extended warranty when you buy the car, but they work even harder not to honor that warranty when you have a problem.
"Sorry sir you did not perform the correct monthly maintenance on your vehicle last month so we will not honor your warranty, you did not lubricate the lock on the trunk as the maintenance manual clearly states so you are responsible for the engine failure!" Oh what a feeling, Toyota🤣
It would be cheaper for Toyota to repair the car than to lose customers that will read this article and not buy a Toyota. I think I'll stick to buying Honda
As you are bent over the trunk lid and given the same lubricant free treatment you gave your trunk lid latch, you hear, "Oh what a feeling, Toyota" playing in your head!😂😂😂😂
"we have determined that we are required to repair or replace the vehicle under warranty. However, we prefer to pay your legal fees as well as the replacement cost of the vehicle."
Exactly, the real reason is probably due to the prior accident that caused front end damage. Either it wasn’t repaired correctly or whoever did the service forgot to fill it with new oil during the change.
Get ready for that to be standard practice. It will be used like all tech: to enshitify your life and make it generally more of an annoying pain in the ass
@bobstorr4986 Who said there was an accident causing damage? He mentioned it was reported I the car fax. That means the car could’ve just had some paint work done on the front and sides because of shopping cart bumps or road hazards like gravel and sand damaging the paint, or it could’ve had a new bumper installed and a fender or whatever because some dum dum bumped into to it in a parking lot - no structural damage. And even if it did have structural damage, that does t mean the engine will get a hole in the side of it. Carfax does not describe the extent of the damage. Also nowhere in the video does it describe any prior damage besides what’s already mentioned in the poor description from carfax. If they can trace back and prove there was massive damage, yes, it MAY have been a/the cause, but it needs more information that is not provided and it seems that it was not searched for in this scenario. They talk about the tires instead. Also no mention is made if the vehicle was classified as salvage or received any other type of branded title previously. So those are also off the table, unless expressly mentioned in the facts and history - which it is not, they talk about tire ratings, and they don’t even state the type of tires on the vehicle. I guarantee the tires from the factory on this vehicle are likely V or W speed rated - well over 85mph rating, look it up. So you assuming the vehicle was crashed previously is silly. Thank you for playing, you are the weakest link, good bye.
We have a toll road in Texas from Austin to east of San Antonio and the posted speed limit is 85. I guess signs need to be posted along the route "Except Toyotas".
Someone needs to put up a billboard warning Toyota owners that the speed limit voids their warranty. Also Texas city council needs sued for damaging our cars!
Sounds like whoever wrote the letter fell asleep in the middle of writing. Then woke up and just finished the letter forgetting what they were originally writing. I did that a few times in high-school.
Yeah, this was "over the allowable warranty claim value" and set for automatic denial. Worth their time to bounce the paperwork around a few times before actually investigating.
@@darkkingastos4369 Yes. Add telltale car computer acquiring big data on all the how, when, and where the car was driven and they can advertise eternal warranties that are unclaimable.
I have a vehicle service contract (extended warranty) with a 3rd party company. I had the power seat fail and filed a claim through the shop doing the repair. The VSC covered power seat failures. The company tried to deny the claim because I had tires different than factory size on the car. The tires happened to be winter tires and were the size specified in the owner's manual. It was also WINTER! They said having the wrong tires voided the entire VSC, though that was not listed as a cause for cancellation in the terms of the VSC. After pointing out that (1) the tires WERE the correct size as stated in the owner's manual, (2) the terms of the VSC stated cancellation could ONLY be due to non-payment of the contract, and (3) tires have NOTHING to do with power seat operation, they finally stopped being asses and paid the claim. The claim was approximately $3000.
We had one of those companies try to deny a claim because it took months to get the part for the repair. At the time the issue arrose, the car was under their coverage, and it took nearly as long to get them to pay, as it did to get the part. It was a turbo for a mazdaspeed miata. If memory serves correctly the turbocharger alone was like $3500 at the time. (Yes, I'm aware that's ridiculous. That's OEM for ya) For context the price on a Renisis engine was only like $3550 at the time. Turbos for speed3 could be had for like $1500 I think? Something like that.
The Magnusson-Moss act protects you there. They have to prove the modification was responsible for and directly caused then failure. Of course, to us it's plain as day, changed tires doesn't make a power seat fail. But their argument is the changed tires invalidate the warranty somehow. This is exactly why we need laws like the Magnusson-Moss act to protect consumers. Common sense says - your winter tires aren't going to break a power seat. If it does, they know it's a problem and it's actionable against them to remedy the problem. So either they can own the seat going out... or they can own the seat going out. Additionally in the case of this Toyota, the factory warranty can't be invalidated by the tires speed rating - unless they can prove that the tires were directly attributed to the failure. A tire speed rating does not magically cause an engine to explode. It can cause the tire to explode and cause an accident, but that wasn't the case here.
A friend bought a corolla. The cars power door locks failed just outside of the 3/36k warranty. Toyota wanted over $5000 for the repair. Toyota is a shark. So many people think they are great and can do no wrong. I know better....
About 7 years ago, HP refused to let me cancel a $500 laptop order, saying I was told it was non-cancelable when I ordered it. I had PDF prints of the listing page and order checkout page, and nowhere on those did it mention it couldn't be canceled. When I investigated, you were only told this via a landing redirect page if you browsed to the product page from the regular store listing. I'd arrived via a direct URL someone had given me ("hey check out this deal"). I escalated through three levels of their customer service, before the highest level manager adamantly refused to let me cancel despite my proof that due to their website's flawed design, there was no way for me to know it was non-cancelable. (Incidentally, it took them nearly two years to fix this flaw in their website despite me reporting it as a bug.) So I accepted the order. I used to do computer consulting on the side for a dozen businesses. When they sought my advice for new purchases I usually drafted a short list of different brands, models, and pricing which would work, described any strengths or weaknesses, and let the client pick. I simply added, "I've had problems with ordering stuff from HP" any time an HP product was on the list. HP products ended up going from about 30%-40% of my orders, to just 1 order in 7 years. I estimate HP lost $20k-$30k in sales because of that one stubborn manager's stupid decision.
They need to put some effort into their excuse. At least make it sound plausible. Next excuse you'll likely hear from Toyota, engine blew due to insufficient amount of blinker fluid in the right front turn signal.
@@somethingclever1234 Indeed! I know, first hand because I had direct affiliation with them for 28yrs. Using the analogy that "police departments don't have 'written quota programs,'" several years ago Toyota began giving dealers "monthly warranty claim thresholds." If that "thresholds" was met, then began the "back 'n forth rigamarole" of attempting to get an obvious component failure (due to "defects in workmanship or materials") covered under warranty. In the scenario presented by Steve, note that Toyota claims to have "inspected" the "GR" (note they didn't specify what specific model, as the "GR" is a performance upgrade package available on a few models), and directed their attention to the tires? Yet, why didn't their response to the claimant make any reference at all as to the "speed rating" of the tires on the car at the time of their, supposed, "inspection?" Thus, why I chose the word "hunting" in my original comment. Truly, a new low achieved for Toyota! I saw the trend begin roughly around 2005 ~ 2006. Not surprised though. They're 110% on board with all the different agendas being pushed by the globalists.
@@somethingclever1234 The warranty is now 10 years (at least in my country). That is a very long time and reason enough to void as many warranties as possible.
All of the automakers are doing this. I'm in the industry and it has ramped up significantly since the pandemic, they will make up any reason to deny coverage.
Yep. I had a Prius engine throw a rod at 82K miles. They said "Sorry Charlie". If Toyota is as good as they claim, why don't they offer a 100K warrantee like American MFGS do?
@sixtyfourchebby4507 I had a coworker who told me that the first generation of Toyotas in the US would overheat when driven on the highway. Edit. I was born in the early 80s.
I worked at goodyear for 34 years, and I once asked a Tire Engineer what the 130 H rating meant. He said they test the tires at 130mph at on their high speed oval in Texas, only stopping to refuel and change tires, untill the tires are worn out. Then they examine the tires for any heat related failures. Now, the lowest rated OEM tire I have ever seen is S rated, which is 112mph. So Toyota, don't tell me I can't run my tires all day at 85 mph, they are engineered for that with a margin of error. Maybe your mechanical systems can't handle driving an extended period at 85 MPH, buth the tire certainly can!
Even the cheap crappy Chinese tyres I have on my basic ass Hyundai hatchback are rated to over 160km/h (100mph). I don't think the car could go any faster than that with it's little 1.4L engine.
@@tin2001 While I get the point your making, I honestly wouldn't trust a Chinese rating on any product that could injure me if it fails. Not everything is, but there's still too much trash products and fakes coming out of China to trust them
Interesting bit of info! I always tell people when shopping for a trailer, check the speed rating on the tires because manny are rated way lower than car tires and prone to high speed failure, especially in the heat on the freeway.
Reminds me of when the CTS-V Cadillac came out. I was a GM World Class Tech at time. They kept having them burn down, because the fuel pipe for the direct injection kept fracturing from "pressure hammering" and would spray fuel directly on the passenger side cat converter. They absolutely were lying to customers, instead of admitting the pipe was totally wrong.
That's wild. I used to do lemon law/breach of warranty research for GM's legal team. We were very careful when issuing warranty blocks (flagged VIN that says "don't warranty x system/component" up to "don't warranty anything other than stock emissions") because if you do it wrong at all it's de facto breach of warranty, and that gets expensive. Their argument is pretty insane too because they advertise the car as being sporty and even list a top speed for it. Their own admission that going above 85 mph should void the warranty put them in hot water. Also no judge in HISTORY is going to buy the argument that your car suddenly shouldn't be reliable if you go 5 mph over the speed limit.
Bottom line is…and I tell this to everyone…your warranty isn’t voided unless a modification made by the consumer can directly be linked to the failure in question. A 5 year old could conclude with basic logic that tire speed rating selection cannot in any way cause a catastrophic engine failure. Toyota knows that, and the response given to the customer is embarrassing on Toyota’s behalf. Do not give money to a company that treats customers this way.
Damn Right, The Magnuson Moss Warranty Act requires manufacturers to honor the original warranty unless they can prove that the aftermarket modification (either the parts or installation) was responsible for the failure that caused warranty repairs.
Yes and changing tires for ones not correctly rated DOES void cars guarantee and insurance. Can it make engine go in flames? No, ofc not it's ridiculous but they deal in technicalities and small print where any such change or modification voids ALL claims. You need to change your ridiculous laws because ofc every corporation will take advantage of them.
@@wykydytron yeah, Im sure it had NOTHING to do with him taking the car to COPART to fix critical fuel issues and get an oil change. Not to mention he was running an aftermarket map.
Something to note here about the "I modified my engine, that shouldn't void the radio warranty" discussion. The MMWA makes really clear that the burden is on the Manufacturer to prove that something that they are refusing to warrant was caused by some sort of modification by the Consumer. A Manufacturer can't partially void a warranty. They can certainly refuse to warrant something though. The problem with the burden of proof being on the Manufacturer is that the Consumer has to sue the Manufacturer to force them to prove that the Consumer modified something that caused the failure the Manufacturer refuses to warrant. I went through this many years ago with Mitsubishi, and ended up having to get an attorney. Dealership sold me a used 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer Evo, and sold with the full warranty intact. However, after encountering a problem that occurred multiple times, they found an aftermarket downpipe and the service lady told me "your warranty is voided". I then made a big deal about the fact that they sold it to me this way, and that I had not made the modification. I got an attorney, which is when Mitsubishi started taking it seriously. They opted to replace the downpipe with the stock version, and in the end they fixed the problem. I'm legally obligated to say that we "settled the matter".
They can partially and completely void a warranty. I worked for GM and did it many times. It's something to be done with EXTREME caution though, because if you don't have an ironclad reason for why you did it WITH PROOF then you're going to get destroyed in court. Generally it was only done (when I worked for GM, which was a while ago) for cases like they were racing a corvette with an aftermarket tune and overrevved it - yeah we're not covering that. Another one was a guy we proved was sabotaging his oxygen sensor by using a battery cable to short it out in the hopes of getting a repurchase. Sounds like some finance bro decided they can make $2 more per share next quarter if they just tell all their customers to pound sand tbh
@@danlorett2184 They can't, and it's not that simple. You may have done it, but you can't void an entire warranty just because of a singular action. You know those "warranty void if removed/broken" stickers on consumer electronics? Yeah, those are illegal. A Manufacturer can deny a warranty claim, but burden of proof is on them to show that the Consumer caused the problem. In your second anecdote, a Manufacturer doesn't get to void a warranty just because a guy tried to commit fraud by purposefully damaging a single component of the warranted product. The Manufacturer can deny the claim to replace the part, but GM doesn't suddenly get to decide that they won't replace that guy's radio when it dies in a year. That just isn't how warranties or the MMWA work. What you were instructed to do is federally illegal, though only a civil matter. What you were doing is marking it as voided internally, but if the Consumer were to fight that, they'd likely prevail. The problem is that it's on the Consumer to force the Manufacturer to fulfill their burden under the law.
@@pyrotempestwing I believe any speed limitations on spare tires primarily come from their size. Full-size spare tires are usually the exact same rim and tire as were used for the four installed on the vehicle at the factory. Donuts, on the other hand, are made much narrower with a different rim and can't safely handle the same speeds or be safely used for long distances.
Yeah, some interstates in a few other states are posted at 85mph speed limit. Imaging having your warranty denied because you... drove the speed limit!
Great Scott! Toyota is just looking out for the consumers. At 85 miles per hour, the flux capacitor begins to engage and will send you back to the future at 88 miles per hour.
For those who don't know the GR Corolla is a high performance variant of the Corolla. 300hp, AWD, manual only. Similar to the Subaru STI and Ford Focus RS. It is advertised as a track ready car. Also Toyota provides a complimentary track experience and discounts for track related items for new GR car owners. The GR Corolla should have zero issues going fast on the highway.
The Michelin Pilot Sport 4S tires that come stock on the Toyota GR Corolla have a speed rating of Y. This means they are rated for speeds up to 186 mph (300 km/h).
They're such junk. We overheated the transfer case in about 5 minutes on track and after an hour on the dyno decided there was no way we were adding one to the shop fleet.
@@forbeshutton5487 No, no, Toyota wants you to pony up the extra cash for "better" tires from the dealer at a 50% markup from what any independent tire dealer would charge.
This story reminds me of why my (former) husband quit being a shade tree mechanic.... He worked almost entirely on friends' cars, and I witnessed one woman say, "Hey, last week you put a new battery in my car, and now the brakes don't work. What did you do to my car??" (And she was serious!)
Reminds me when my buddy started out in the automotive business in mid 90's working for Speedy Oil Change. One lady complained that changing her oil caused a rattle in her dash. She was dead serious and livid.
No insurance and whack-a-doodle customers trying to lowball me are precisely why I never did "side work" during my 38 years as a mechanic. Never do "paid work" for family or friends, it rarely ends well.
When they started down the tire route, i figured they were going to try and claim the owner had smaller tires, causing the engine to overspeed to maintain 85mph. Rather, the seem to imply their OEM tires are actually suited for lawnmowers/go-carts.
That would be funny but really it's only about 4 to 8 mi an hour difference. And any legal circumstances in arguing this mathematic equation in miles per hour, there has to be a 10 to 15 mph tolerance because no speedometer is perfect
@@TravisEastlick-l6z "And any legal circumstances in arguing this mathematic equation in miles per hour, there has to be a 10 to 15 mph tolerance because no speedometer is perfect." Close, but no. "Federal standards for speedometers in the United States require that they be accurate to within 5% of the actual speed, or plus or minus 2.5%. For example, at 60 miles per hour, a speedometer should read no more than 1.5 miles per hour higher or lower than the actual speed. This requirement is found in 49 CFR §393.82." The reason for the error, tire size, gearing, etc., is irrelevant.
The speedometers and odometers assumes proper tire size, so of you havr wrong size tires, the speed reading will be wrong. What the car really reads is the rotation of the axles, and convert it to speed and distance.
If Toyota’s aren’t capable of 85 mph they seriously need a redesign. My MINI JCW Roadster probably isn’t supposed to go over 85, but it does quite frequently. In fact while living in Arizona I once told the MINI service writer there was something wrong with the car’s speedometer as it continually became “stuck” in the triple digits. He immediately delved into his computer looking for a service bulletin addressing the problem. Several minutes later he just smiled at me.
What do you expect from a engine that a 3 cylinder 1.6l of course has to have a turbo to put out 300HP. Any engineer or technical savvy person will likely know why the engine failed. Let just say they put a massively undersize engine and using the turbo to compensate pretty much. The engine wasn't design to handle that type of power for long term. It a new way for these companies to cut costs. Pretty much look at GM with the 1.4L engine and turbo early on especially. All those engines pretty much failed around 100k mark if not earlier for the same reasons early revisions and course turbo itself like to fail as well. The same chevy cars with the naturally aspirated 1.8L without the turbo last way longer with way less repairs seen some with over 240k on the odometer without major repairs needing to be done.
I had an '83 Supra. Within the warranty period but 100 miles overdue for an oil change, driving along at the speed limit on the Interstate, it started clattering and before I got to an exit it threw a rod. Toyota wouldn't fix it, claiming it was overdue for an oil change, so I shelled out the 5 grand for a new engine. Well, another 15,000 miles on it threw another one. I sold it for scrap and bought a used Corvette on the basis that it was impossible to do $5000 worth of damage to a 1984 Chevrolet V8. Put 120,000 miles on that 'Vette with no major issues (needed a new alternator once, that's about it). Based on Toyota's recent reputation, I was thinking about forgiving them and getting another one. Nope. Not gonna do that, looks like they haven't changed.
Those early to mid '80s Supras were great looking and great driving cars, when they weren't broken. But there's a reason why you never see them anymore. Once they got some miles on them, the cost of keeping one roadworthy would quickly exceed its value.
@@michaelallen1432 Why? At that point, he was overdue to required maintenance for the warranty. A good fight is a good fight, but if you like your warranty - better stick to the maintenance schedule and document it.....otherwise you have no chance in court.
In Texas we have toll roads where you can legally drive 85 mph. Thus, I can't see how Toyota can justify denying a claim when that speed is legal in certain areas.
The tyres must have a speed rating based on the max speed the car is capable, not the speed limit. That's is why they are so expensive on performance cars, even if you never drive at 150mph.
A good demonstration of ONE of the reasons I never buy new cars anymore. Funny, my 30 year old 300,000 mile Volvo is driven mostly on the turnpikes and sustains a smooth happy 85mph every day without ever blowing up or catching fire.
@@rgt33 I’ve had one, great cars, love how they drive….the 5 cylinder engines are really good and reliable, when well kept up. They are a bit more complicated and finicky than the the old simple RWD bricks like I currently drive so they require more maintenance. Main reason I don’t have one anymore, but still fantastic cars when decently looked after. 😊
In 1990 I bought an '87 Toyota Tercel. About six months after purchasing it, I was pulling up to my house and noticed some smoke coming out of the steering column, then through a seam in the column cover I could see a small flame. I jumped out of the car and within no more than 15 seconds the entire interior of the car was engulfed in 20 foot flames. It was a great little city commuter, until it wasn't.
That's just insane. What if you'd parked in a garage! I used to have a mid 80s Honda Accord. Just went on and on. Kept it until it was ~20. Guess I'm not switching to Toyota.
No, they don't make good products. What they do is spend billions in advertising to make you think that. People are so brain washed, and pressured by the fan bois online, they can't admit Toyotas are not good cars.
I've worked for Ford, Chevy, Toyota and Subaru. Toyota is by far the best brand in reliability, usually it's only major problems that come through the shop. At Ford and Chevy, everything broke and we had full parking lots 24/7
I came here to say that. I owned two and one was a Highlander and the front break locked up and caught on fire. They tried to say i rode the brakes even though the other three brakes had no wear. i only had 200 miles on a brand new car less than a month old. Never bought a Toyota again. They did find a bad brake line and finally replaced only after my attorney called them.
@@donwyoming1936 I am an old man. Have owned and worked on many vehicles. Toyota by far engineers and builds its products with reliability as a very high priority. Many of the push back issues people face is not Toyota the company but individuals that through experience know how consistently reliable the vehicles are suppose it has to be the user's fault. Most of the time they are correct. I contradict your "they do not make good products" statement strongly.
WOW the most messed up thing from the original article " For passenger car tires, the lowest widely-available speed ratings are S, which is capable of handling 112 mph, T, which features an upper threshold of 118 mph, or H, which is good up to 130 mph. " " As confirmed in the official Toyota press picture above, the GR Corolla Core and Circuit Edition trims come from the factory on (Y)-rated Michelin Pilot Sport 4 summer tires that are good for more than 186 mph. "
Doesn't matter if the tires are not the original tires the car came with. Granted most any normal replacement tire should be more than capable of speeds in excess of 85mph but there are some oddball sizes that just aren't available except as offroad use only trailer tires or something like that. I'm sure none of that applies here but it is something to keep in mind
I took a quick look at the tires that come on that car between 2020 to current year - The lowest rating tire in the options was S rated at 112 MPH, but most were rated well above that.
This car is a GR Corolla, which only has 2023/2024 model years. It’s a performance-oriented version with Michelin Pilot Sport 4 tires that are Y rated for 186+ mph.
@@AFTER_MIDNITEwell perhaps it's this guy's optometrist that needs to be in the hot seat because he failed to see something going wrong with this car and failed to take proper measurements to save China some money.
@@AFTER_MIDNITE Yeah, I was looking for the lowest rating on any tire they offered. The lowest was S rated. Their speed concern on the tires doesn't apply at all in this case.
Thank you so much for posting this…it is Sunday August 11, 2024. I have been test driving Sedans and have settled on two. The Toyota Crown Sedan or The Audi A6. After a conversation with my wife last night we had decided to go with the slightly less expensive Toyota But after seeing this ….now I have changed my mind and Monday after work I’ll be purchasing the Audi. Who would have thought that Toyota would act in such a despicable manner toward what is most likely a loyal customer.
Audi puts design flaws on the market and won’t stand behind their products. Look into the oil consumption issues with the 2.0T. My son’s Q5 got an engine rebuild. My other son’s A4 is a year newer, and was not in the class action. He burns a quart every 700 miles. My son’s Q5 is having transmission issues because they put the circuit board in the trans fluid, and it’s deteriorating.
@@jamesgeorge4874 You're forgetting the time someone spends fighting it, the hardship, the costs, the emotional toll of fighting over years while you have to pay for another car......sure, not 100M but also not nothing
If Toyota is making the case that they car was used at a track day (and possibly crashed while blowing the engine), the there is no warranty - track use voids it for virtually all manufacturers.
I worked at a Chevrolet dealership years ago. I remember seeing order sheets that stated if you ordered a ZL1 427 in a Corvette, it would come with "No Warranty" stickers. Hardly anybody could ever afford that engine anyway back then!
I guarantee this is what happened. The same thing happened to my daughter's 4Runner, and 10 other cars I have seen. There are certain parts in the engine that are made of a white plastic that break off and end up in the oil flow. Once it clogs the uptake, there is no lubrication on the crank, and it blows a hole in the side of your block. It is always catastrophic, dramatic, and sometimes causes fire because of hot combustible liquids hitting hot surfaces with plenty of air flow to support combustion.
Even S-rated tires are 112mph capable. T- and H-rated are even higher. GR Corolla probably come with tires that are rated for twice the 85mph Toyota claimed it should be able to be driven at.
@@BCNeil Even many many years ago when I bought the cheapest tires I could find as a 17 year old, I can't ever remember seeing tires rated less than 98mph, usually 118 even for the cheap 30k mile warranty tires.
I despise all these companies that say we "CAN'T" or "CANNOT" help you. Yes the CAN. They simple CHOOSE not to. If they were honest they would state it that way: "Sorry we choose not to help you." Or, "We will not help you."
Toyota used to be an amazing product. My grandparents swore on their lives they'd never have anything except a Toyota. Unfortunately like many manufacturers Toyota seems to have lost what made them known as a reliable car company and chased profits instead of maintaining their brand
My father swore that he'd never have a foreign vehicle until the buyback under the Obama administration. My parents suddenly each had a Toyota! 🤦♀️🤷♀️
I think something happened since Covid where their quality went way down. Could be a combination of that and poor leadership (similar to what’s happened to Boeing).
Toyota talking about tires & operated speed. Then refusing warranty on the engine. Is as ridiculous as a restaurant saying they're not responsible for food poisoning you. Cause of the speed you ate the poisonous food. The issue would be the food, not the speed. Just as the issue is the engine, not the tires.
Toyota are calling his bluff !! Sue us if you dare ! Also, Steve is 100% correct. If Toyota is denying his warranty, they must specify, IN DETAIL, why..
I guess you have never looked at big tires on lifted pick up trucks load range E designed for hauling weight, OR 18 wheeler tires! That's MILLIONS of tires. How is your seeing eye dog doing?
I think the GR Corolla came out in March of 2022. Toyota has a 3/36 bumper to bumper and 5/60 engine/powertrain warranty. Based on this and the mileage you mentioned, This car should have still been under warranty.
In many western states, the Interstate speed limit is 80 . In Texas, on at least one road, it's 85. The warning has to do with tire rating, not an inherent problem with the engine.
Don’t forget Europe either. Where 130 kmh is common place not to forget Germany with the autobahn. Toyota not covering those speeds means there not be able to sell anything in Europe either.
I actually saw the dashcam video in question 3 days ago. Dude was just cruising when the engine detonated. I was honestly impressed with: (1) - His calm demeanor throughout the video (2) - How fast the fire spread (3) - How long the dashcam kept rolling
1- thank you! I was internally panicking and questioning my life 2- how quick it spread made me feel very lucky I hadn’t made it home and into my garage 3- Nexar sent me a new camera because of the video. Gave me their best model for free plus $200 Amazon gift card. And even though I’ve technically been paid to say this, I have to admit they’ve really improved the user interface. It’s super easy to use and connect to as long as it’s not a faulty camera.
There's a road in the UK that if you drive down people abuse you from the side of it. They shout "you're in idiot", "you can't drive", "your car is rubbish", and they even say mean things about your looks and weight. It's a troll road.
They've treated several of the GR86 owners horribly as well--e.g. saying using the car at a track day nullified the warranty; hilariously, a complimentary track day and 1-year NASA membership were included with the purchase of the car!!! You cannot make this up. They only ever relent if the owner goes to a publication and they make a big public stink about it and humiliate Toyota. I'm THRILLED that when I upgraded my 2013 FR-S to a new 86 in '22, I went with a BRZ instead of a GR86. Admittedly, it was entirely because Toyota refused to let me customize a car to my preferences and tried to foist a crappy AT model off of me, while Subaru let me config everything exactly to spec and put in a PO over the phone in less than 20 minutes, but the fact Subaru isn't out here ducking every single warranty claim like they think they're in 'The Matrix' is a pretty nice bonus.
I think Steve did a couple videos on that; one where they denied the warranty claim because he was racing, and one when they walked it back because of the blowback. Over the last few years, Toyota's had a real problem with 'act now, think about how the buyers will react later'.
I would have thought Toyota learned from the whole GR86 media blowback. Apparently not. Subaru generally seems to have been reasonable about the whole thing for the BRZ. Glad I never had to use the warranty on my Legacy GT, hope the same goes for my WRX. Subaru has a lot of goodwill to burn on me.
That Toyota letter arguments, holds no water. I would like to see trying that in a court hearing. Probably the company attorney fees will make the case more complicated than honoring the services.
I almost went up in flames due to a brazed high pressure fuel rail failing at the brazed connection. 1500 psi 91 octane geyser under the hood, was lucky none of it found an ignition source. I was only driving 70 though.
That's how YOU caused the failure. If you had kept your speed up, the fuel would have been pushed into the cylinders and not overpressurized the fuel rail. Warranty denied.
Sounds like the scam from dealers that sell used car lifetime powertrain warranties, provided you get their oil changes AND tire rotations (even if you just bought a new set of tires). Without the tire rotation you might not get your transmission repaired under warranty. In fact, it voids your warranty! Ask McClusky Chevrolet in Cincinnati!
Redline is generally the maximum permitted engine load and speed. The yellow arc or band on the tach (if it exists) is to be avoided in continuous use, such as climbing a 10 mile long hill in a fully loaded vehicle. Other that that, the engine operating loads are within design limits, anywhere anytime anyplace at any throttle position. 2500RPM, 4000RPM, etc. Climbing that hill puts way more load on the eng than 85 cruise.
Except all the manufacturers are the same. The cars are engineered to last just enough past the warranty so that any claims they have to pay don't eat into profits too much. They might lose some business from people that now think Brand X has better quality, but as long as that's less than the number that keeps buying Toyota because they perceive a better initial value, then Toyota won't care. Very few people keep new cars past the warranty/finance period, so manufacturers don't design cars to last longer than that, ensuring people buy a new car every 5 years or so.
The I-10 in west Texas has a speed limit of 85 mph. If Toyota can’t be operated at this legal speed, then Toyota has failed its customers.
Same with in Idaho, I85 has an 85mph speed limit as well.
They're trying to make sure you can't time travel. Sue them for preventing you from going 88mph.
They're not saying that it's illegal to drive 85mph or even that their cars can't drive 85mph. They're saying not to drive over 85mph unless the tires are rated for high speed, which they were and the guy's tires never failed.
It's just a bunch of nonsense.
Welcome to Toyota. More concerned with their corporate image than actually making good, safe cars. They spend billions making you think their cars are the best. People have completely bought into it.
Regardless of the speed limit, car owners need to know the tire speed rating and drive accordingly.
Note that the ratings are fairly conservative - esp. for short periods of speed over the rating.
If a speed limit is 85, what speed do people typically drive?
Seems to me that most cars are sold with T or H speed tires - over 100 mph (118 and 130 mph)
1) The sky is blue
2) Your Toyota is red
3) We cite random facts
4) Your warranty is dead
The denial is a total non-sequitur and they know it.
5) Burma Shave
That reply is absolute gold. hahahahahaha
It's the Chewbacca defense.
Damn😂
Your poem was great except your last line totally didn't rhyme.
Maybe add "and Toyota's engines blow it"
🎉
"You drove the car? Warranty VOID!!"
The stock tires are Michelin Pilot Sport 4s, which are “Y” rated for 186 MPH… 100 MPH over 85. Furthermore, included with every new purchase of the GR Corolla is a free track day. This car is meant to be driven fast. And this model has only been around since 2023. If this guy lawyers up, I have no doubt this would be a slam dunk case.
I agree. This is so ridiculous. Like buy a corvette, WRX, or even a miata and go 85mph blows up the engine. The heck
Agreed.
What a great (devious) ploy by Toyota: give buyers a free track day so they almost immediately void their warranty.
"Nothing in our offer of a free track day encouraged driving above 85mph."
It's so wacky to even think about because you could literally cruise at 90 mph and do less damage than launching it and bouncing off the rev limiter but never go above 60
@RobHTech wrx definitely will. Garbage cars lmao
I’m an auto appraiser. They ADMITTED the failure was a. Internal mechanical failure. Toyota is WRONG.
The ar$e holes just don't want to pay
I don't think we have all the information. He mentioned the car was just in for service, so did the service center forget to do something, i.e. fill the engine back up with oil.
@@VaporheadATC What info could we be missing?
"He mentioned the car was just in for service, so did the service center forget to do something, i.e. fill the engine back up with oil."
Then Toyota would have said that. Instead they said you need to make sure you have the right tires for going over 85.
@@VaporheadATC That sounds like what happened. Someone at Toyota pulled a Jiffy Lube maneuver.
Shameful of Toyota with that claim and I love my Toyota trucks.
Toyota is throwing away decades of goodwill and embracing the suck.
This is nothing new for them. There was a class action in the late 2000s/early 2010s about their cars accelerating uncontrollably that revealed that they know their cars are junk and full of flaws but they are trying to keep the image of safe, reliable, and no recalls so even if they're is a known defect they won't recall it and just let it happen over and over again at the owners expense and if the owner wants a permanent fix they will try to force them to die individually.
They lost our goodwill 30 years ago.
@@sypothwas that not more or less user error? I had one friend use the Toyota accelerating on its own defense in traffic court. He got his speeding ticket thrown out with a less than truthful mechanic report about this issue on his car as evidence.
@@AlGoYoSu I don't know about the Toyota issue, but the issue with Audis a few years before was definitely found to be user error. In virtually every case, the Audi was the driver's first European car. At the time Audi used the same pedal cluster for automatic and manual cars (they just omitted the clutch pedal on automatic cars), and their pedals were set up for heel and toe downshifting, so the throttle and brake were closer together than many drivers of American cars were used to. They just stepped on the wrong pedal :-(.
That's because all things are now owned by the same few groups of people
"You touched the car, therefore we feel we shouldn't have to honor the warranty."
I wonder if they put that "warranty void" sticker across the door gaps.
Still waiting for a sticker over the ignition that says warranty will be voided when broken...
By opening this package, you agree to the following terms of service....
-- Terms of service found INSIDE the package.
"You drove the car, which voids the warranty."
Dear Toyota, Moss Magnuson rejects your reality and substitutes its own regulatory framework.
Whoever answered sounds like a politician - when asked a question you don't want to answer, answer a different, unasked, question!
That response sounds a lot like Toyota used Artificial Intelligance to respond to the question.
Artificial Intelligence is pretty dumb and getting dumber.
@@jonathanrabbittThey make up imaginary court cases that support their position lol
Yup. LLM really stands for Lying Language Model.
😂😂😂
100 % .
Texas, which is the HQ of Toyota USA, has speed limits of 85 MPH. You'd think Toyota of USA would recognize that people will go 85MPH.
Hell, people in California will do 100+ on a clear straight interstate. I’ve been passed by busses before when I have my cruise set to 80
especially a racing spec vehicle. GR stands for Gazoo Racing
Look this is one incident of a very popular car company. I am sure once it is all said and done this person will have a settlement based on what is provided. Right now there is probably 20 or so of those engines doing over 85 mph every second of every day in just say Texas. This is super conservative the customer service may be slipping but they get their share of scammers!
@@Madmoody21 the guy with the bone stock 86 who blew up his engine on a track day never got a settlement.
@@PigglyWigglyDeluxe
Yea, that's because he went on a track and blew up his engine. That's not a mechanical issue if you made the mistake! I believe cars have black boxes just like airplanes do. If this guy did something he wasn't supposed to, they would be saying that and not this nonsense.
It's comical that they work so hard to sell you an extended warranty when you buy the car, but they work even harder not to honor that warranty when you have a problem.
when having a division of your company dedicated to that task because it is still cheaper than being honest
Selling the warranty is free money, honoring it is an unbearable expense
Just like insurance companies.
Because they want your money but they don't want your problems. This is why you buy old cars and work on them
That’s the dealership not manufacturer. Never buy the dealership warranty!
"Sorry sir you did not perform the correct monthly maintenance on your vehicle last month so we will not honor your warranty, you did not lubricate the lock on the trunk as the maintenance manual clearly states so you are responsible for the engine failure!" Oh what a feeling, Toyota🤣
It would be cheaper for Toyota to repair the car than to lose customers that will read this article and not buy a Toyota. I think I'll stick to buying Honda
As you are bent over the trunk lid and given the same lubricant free treatment you gave your trunk lid latch, you hear, "Oh what a feeling, Toyota" playing in your head!😂😂😂😂
Sounds like ChatGPT wrote that report.
ChatGPT's writing is actually more coherent.
Exactly! By letting an AI write the warranty rejection this allows them to skirt all kinds of counter suits.
@@Strideo1 They probably just don't have premium, so they're stuck with GPT3
Thought the exact same thing
@@rpm773 That was my first thought... chap gpt
It blows my mind that companies continue to do this kind of thing. It’s just not worth the bad publicity.
MBA/business school grads who are desperate to show the CEO that they can keep costs down.
Possibly, wherever that Toyota is manufactured. They're interested in quantity, not quality.
Actually, it is. This is why they don’t care.
@@goingagainstthegrain, it's not just Toyota.
It is though they're going to still sell millions of dollars worth of cars.
It appears your windshield washer fluid was empty while you were driving 85 MPH. Engine claim is denied.
Or you replaced the Toyota brand windshield washer fluid with an offbrand and your warranty is denied
@@jamescaron6465 non-toyota-branded distilled water
The windows were down with the radio on- denied
"we have determined that we are required to repair or replace the vehicle under warranty. However, we prefer to pay your legal fees as well as the replacement cost of the vehicle."
must be the blinker fluid is empty
Wouldnt it be fantastic if the Carolla owners lawyer quoted Steve verbatim in court.
Their response feels so much like someone at Toyota asked Chat-GPT to create something, leading to this rambling stream of bizarre statements.
Yep. Was thinking the same thing.
More likely it was a cut and paste job trying to get to lunch. But some basic idea.
Exactly, the real reason is probably due to the prior accident that caused front end damage. Either it wasn’t repaired correctly or whoever did the service forgot to fill it with new oil during the change.
Get ready for that to be standard practice. It will be used like all tech: to enshitify your life and make it generally more of an annoying pain in the ass
@bobstorr4986
Who said there was an accident causing damage?
He mentioned it was reported I the car fax.
That means the car could’ve just had some paint work done on the front and sides because of shopping cart bumps or road hazards like gravel and sand damaging the paint, or it could’ve had a new bumper installed and a fender or whatever because some dum dum bumped into to it in a parking lot - no structural damage. And even if it did have structural damage, that does t mean the engine will get a hole in the side of it. Carfax does not describe the extent of the damage. Also nowhere in the video does it describe any prior damage besides what’s already mentioned in the poor description from carfax. If they can trace back and prove there was massive damage, yes, it MAY have been a/the cause, but it needs more information that is not provided and it seems that it was not searched for in this scenario. They talk about the tires instead. Also no mention is made if the vehicle was classified as salvage or received any other type of branded title previously. So those are also off the table, unless expressly mentioned in the facts and history - which it is not, they talk about tire ratings, and they don’t even state the type of tires on the vehicle. I guarantee the tires from the factory on this vehicle are likely V or W speed rated - well over 85mph rating, look it up.
So you assuming the vehicle was crashed previously is silly. Thank you for playing, you are the weakest link, good bye.
We have a toll road in Texas from Austin to east of San Antonio and the posted speed limit is 85. I guess signs need to be posted along the route "Except Toyotas".
My wife drives on I-130 frequently in her Toyota
Someone needs to put up a billboard warning Toyota owners that the speed limit voids their warranty. Also Texas city council needs sued for damaging our cars!
I can just see it. SPEED LIMIT 85, then a little black sign below that: TOYOTA 65.
Yep. Been on that one a few times with a 2008 Honda CRV... didn't blow up! LOL
@mambi74 I bet that sucker was singing along pretty good at 85+ 😂
Not in a bad way. They like the RPM from time to time lol
Sounds like whoever wrote the letter fell asleep in the middle of writing. Then woke up and just finished the letter forgetting what they were originally writing. I did that a few times in high-school.
Or maybe it was AI.
If you drive 88mph or faster there is risk of uncontrolled time travel. good job Toyota for keeping people safe.
Yeah. The CIA strictly enforces time travel. Good post!
*Ha!, ha! Only DeLorean's allowed...*
Toyota sent this response because they're hoping the owner will just drop the claim because they denied it.
I think this is designed to pave the way for AI warranty rejections that will render warranties unenforcable
Yeah, this was "over the allowable warranty claim value" and set for automatic denial.
Worth their time to bounce the paperwork around a few times before actually investigating.
@@darkkingastos4369 Yes. Add telltale car computer acquiring big data on all the how, when, and where the car was driven and they can advertise eternal warranties that are unclaimable.
Toyota is not the company it was 20 years ago
I have a vehicle service contract (extended warranty) with a 3rd party company. I had the power seat fail and filed a claim through the shop doing the repair. The VSC covered power seat failures. The company tried to deny the claim because I had tires different than factory size on the car. The tires happened to be winter tires and were the size specified in the owner's manual. It was also WINTER! They said having the wrong tires voided the entire VSC, though that was not listed as a cause for cancellation in the terms of the VSC. After pointing out that (1) the tires WERE the correct size as stated in the owner's manual, (2) the terms of the VSC stated cancellation could ONLY be due to non-payment of the contract, and (3) tires have NOTHING to do with power seat operation, they finally stopped being asses and paid the claim. The claim was approximately $3000.
We had one of those companies try to deny a claim because it took months to get the part for the repair. At the time the issue arrose, the car was under their coverage, and it took nearly as long to get them to pay, as it did to get the part.
It was a turbo for a mazdaspeed miata. If memory serves correctly the turbocharger alone was like $3500 at the time.
(Yes, I'm aware that's ridiculous. That's OEM for ya)
For context the price on a Renisis engine was only like $3550 at the time. Turbos for speed3 could be had for like $1500 I think? Something like that.
Those companies are entire scams.
The Magnusson-Moss act protects you there. They have to prove the modification was responsible for and directly caused then failure.
Of course, to us it's plain as day, changed tires doesn't make a power seat fail. But their argument is the changed tires invalidate the warranty somehow. This is exactly why we need laws like the Magnusson-Moss act to protect consumers.
Common sense says - your winter tires aren't going to break a power seat. If it does, they know it's a problem and it's actionable against them to remedy the problem. So either they can own the seat going out... or they can own the seat going out.
Additionally in the case of this Toyota, the factory warranty can't be invalidated by the tires speed rating - unless they can prove that the tires were directly attributed to the failure. A tire speed rating does not magically cause an engine to explode. It can cause the tire to explode and cause an accident, but that wasn't the case here.
A friend bought a corolla. The cars power door locks failed just outside of the 3/36k warranty. Toyota wanted over $5000 for the repair.
Toyota is a shark. So many people think they are great and can do no wrong. I know better....
lol someone dumb enough to buy a third party extended warranty.
The GR Corolla comes with Pilot Sport 4 tires, which have a speed rating of 186 mph. What an unusual thing to bring up.
Even on a base Corolla, the factory tires should be capable of running at top speed (> 100 mph).
Yea, making the claim that tyres don't even have a speed rating of 100 MPH is just no. Many of these cars can be taken and driven on the tracks.
@bobbbobb4663 the base corolla is computer limited to about 113. Ask me how I know
@@johnevans9751
You can get a different EPROM, ask me how I know....
@@johnevans9751 I can say the same thing about a 1990 Subaru Legacy (110 mph). Not my fault there was no one on the highway to slow me down :-)
Love to see it go to court and see judge and juries reaction to totally irrelevant information about tires.
I’m not sure why Toyota didn’t bring up the more pressing matter of the owner removing his mattress tag after purchase.
You're allowed to remove the tag after you purchase it
@@samholdsworth420
Depends, you better read the damn tag. Many say to not remove it!
Perfect retort to Toyota...
@@Delimon007 most of them are perforated so you can tear them off easily 😂
@@samholdsworth420 that’s the joke.
Toyota could have just given the guy a new car that cost maybe $30K. Now they have lost a ton of sales because of a bad decision.
Core is about 36K. If it's the Circuit model, that gets up to about 46K
can't buy one if you want one.
Yep. My last 6 new cars have been Toyota. This type of bs makes it very unlikely my next new car will be a Toyota.
About 7 years ago, HP refused to let me cancel a $500 laptop order, saying I was told it was non-cancelable when I ordered it. I had PDF prints of the listing page and order checkout page, and nowhere on those did it mention it couldn't be canceled. When I investigated, you were only told this via a landing redirect page if you browsed to the product page from the regular store listing. I'd arrived via a direct URL someone had given me ("hey check out this deal").
I escalated through three levels of their customer service, before the highest level manager adamantly refused to let me cancel despite my proof that due to their website's flawed design, there was no way for me to know it was non-cancelable. (Incidentally, it took them nearly two years to fix this flaw in their website despite me reporting it as a bug.)
So I accepted the order. I used to do computer consulting on the side for a dozen businesses. When they sought my advice for new purchases I usually drafted a short list of different brands, models, and pricing which would work, described any strengths or weaknesses, and let the client pick. I simply added, "I've had problems with ordering stuff from HP" any time an HP product was on the list. HP products ended up going from about 30%-40% of my orders, to just 1 order in 7 years. I estimate HP lost $20k-$30k in sales because of that one stubborn manager's stupid decision.
@@billc.riemers3245 Unfortunately, they all do this crap. Some are just better at hiding it.
They are just throwing stuff at the wall in hopes this person just accepts defeat.
That's a thing with money.. if you have it, you're good
They need to put some effort into their excuse. At least make it sound plausible.
Next excuse you'll likely hear from Toyota, engine blew due to insufficient amount of blinker fluid in the right front turn signal.
@@ki5aok Damn, I forgot about the blinker fluid! My bad...
Spots on the Wall, by Hoo Flung Dung!
Good old SLAPP suits.
pretty sure that Toyota should have to include in their advertisements "WARNING: car may ignite if speeds of 85mph or higher are attained"
Several years ago Toyota began "hunting" for reasons to deny warranty coverage for obvious warrantable components.
that blows my mind, Toyota used to be a top 3 manufacturer..
@@somethingclever1234
Indeed!
I know, first hand because I had direct affiliation with them for 28yrs.
Using the analogy that "police departments don't have 'written quota programs,'" several years ago Toyota began giving dealers "monthly warranty claim thresholds." If that "thresholds" was met, then began the "back 'n forth rigamarole" of attempting to get an obvious component failure (due to "defects in workmanship or materials") covered under warranty.
In the scenario presented by Steve, note that Toyota claims to have "inspected" the "GR" (note they didn't specify what specific model, as the "GR" is a performance upgrade package available on a few models), and directed their attention to the tires? Yet, why didn't their response to the claimant make any reference at all as to the "speed rating" of the tires on the car at the time of their, supposed, "inspection?"
Thus, why I chose the word "hunting" in my original comment.
Truly, a new low achieved for Toyota!
I saw the trend begin roughly around 2005 ~ 2006.
Not surprised though. They're 110% on board with all the different agendas being pushed by the globalists.
@@somethingclever1234 The warranty is now 10 years (at least in my country). That is a very long time and reason enough to void as many warranties as possible.
All of the automakers are doing this. I'm in the industry and it has ramped up significantly since the pandemic, they will make up any reason to deny coverage.
Yep. I had a Prius engine throw a rod at 82K miles. They said "Sorry Charlie".
If Toyota is as good as they claim, why don't they offer a 100K warrantee like American MFGS do?
They did a credit check on the guy and figured he couldn’t afford to sue them.
*Good point! Surely some shark at TMC's legal Dept looked at it.*
I wasn't aware that the tyres are directly connected to the engine in Toyotas. You learn something new every day.
Marty McFly just blew in and said they should have bought a Delorean😂😂😂
Great video Mr. Lehto!
Maybe that is their fear. You hit 88mph and go back in time and the car is under warranty again.
Hey, Toyota- my 48 year- old Plymouth Valiant will cruise at 85 mph for hours and not catch fire. Just did it this year in March, still working.
Exactly! Remember the Toyota of the 70s? Yeah this!
My 31 year old F150 will also. 270k miles on original engine.
@sixtyfourchebby4507 I had a coworker who told me that the first generation of Toyotas in the US would overheat when driven on the highway.
Edit. I was born in the early 80s.
@@JT-lq4yd junk! And sheeple keep the mortgages going....
My first car was a 1966 Plymouth Valiant.
I worked at goodyear for 34 years, and I once asked a Tire Engineer what the 130 H rating meant. He said they test the tires at 130mph at on their high speed oval in Texas, only stopping to refuel and change tires, untill the tires are worn out. Then they examine the tires for any heat related failures. Now, the lowest rated OEM tire I have ever seen is S rated, which is 112mph. So Toyota, don't tell me I can't run my tires all day at 85 mph, they are engineered for that with a margin of error. Maybe your mechanical systems can't handle driving an extended period at 85 MPH, buth the tire certainly can!
Even the cheap crappy Chinese tyres I have on my basic ass Hyundai hatchback are rated to over 160km/h (100mph). I don't think the car could go any faster than that with it's little 1.4L engine.
@@tin2001 While I get the point your making, I honestly wouldn't trust a Chinese rating on any product that could injure me if it fails. Not everything is, but there's still too much trash products and fakes coming out of China to trust them
Not sure why tires were mentioned in the assessment, because it would have zero to do with the motor blowing up.
I have had speed ratings of 80mph or lower but it's always been for small motorcycles that top out at 50mph
Interesting bit of info! I always tell people when shopping for a trailer, check the speed rating on the tires because manny are rated way lower than car tires and prone to high speed failure, especially in the heat on the freeway.
Reminds me of when the CTS-V Cadillac came out.
I was a GM World Class Tech at time. They kept having them burn down, because the fuel pipe for the direct injection kept fracturing from "pressure hammering" and would spray fuel directly on the passenger side cat converter.
They absolutely were lying to customers, instead of admitting the pipe was totally wrong.
Did the solve that problem on the CTS V?
That's wild. I used to do lemon law/breach of warranty research for GM's legal team. We were very careful when issuing warranty blocks (flagged VIN that says "don't warranty x system/component" up to "don't warranty anything other than stock emissions") because if you do it wrong at all it's de facto breach of warranty, and that gets expensive.
Their argument is pretty insane too because they advertise the car as being sporty and even list a top speed for it. Their own admission that going above 85 mph should void the warranty put them in hot water. Also no judge in HISTORY is going to buy the argument that your car suddenly shouldn't be reliable if you go 5 mph over the speed limit.
Bottom line is…and I tell this to everyone…your warranty isn’t voided unless a modification made by the consumer can directly be linked to the failure in question. A 5 year old could conclude with basic logic that tire speed rating selection cannot in any way cause a catastrophic engine failure. Toyota knows that, and the response given to the customer is embarrassing on Toyota’s behalf. Do not give money to a company that treats customers this way.
Damn Right, The Magnuson Moss Warranty Act requires manufacturers to honor the original warranty unless they can prove that the aftermarket modification (either the parts or installation) was responsible for the failure that caused warranty repairs.
Right on all points but I would be interested in seeing Toyota try and prove their point.
Yes and changing tires for ones not correctly rated DOES void cars guarantee and insurance. Can it make engine go in flames? No, ofc not it's ridiculous but they deal in technicalities and small print where any such change or modification voids ALL claims. You need to change your ridiculous laws because ofc every corporation will take advantage of them.
@@wykydytron yeah, Im sure it had NOTHING to do with him taking the car to COPART to fix critical fuel issues and get an oil change. Not to mention he was running an aftermarket map.
@@wykydytron That's literally the point. Do you think the United States is actually functionally different from Mainland China? Don't make me laugh!
I hope this guy takes this to court and wins
Normally I would suspect that we haven't heard the whole story. But Toyota's response changed my mind.
The car owner needs to tell Toyota to save the excuses for the jury.
The real news is that the dealer knows how fast he was driving
That isn’t news, they have an app that you willingly agree to let Toyota track your driving.
The on board computer stores a lot of info.
They checked the computer in the car
💯💯💯💯
*Bingo! Louis Rossmann would approve your comment.*
Steve, I cannot even begin to tell you how many engines I've blown due to the incorrect tires!
Mostly because it never happened 😂
Something to note here about the "I modified my engine, that shouldn't void the radio warranty" discussion. The MMWA makes really clear that the burden is on the Manufacturer to prove that something that they are refusing to warrant was caused by some sort of modification by the Consumer. A Manufacturer can't partially void a warranty. They can certainly refuse to warrant something though. The problem with the burden of proof being on the Manufacturer is that the Consumer has to sue the Manufacturer to force them to prove that the Consumer modified something that caused the failure the Manufacturer refuses to warrant.
I went through this many years ago with Mitsubishi, and ended up having to get an attorney. Dealership sold me a used 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer Evo, and sold with the full warranty intact. However, after encountering a problem that occurred multiple times, they found an aftermarket downpipe and the service lady told me "your warranty is voided". I then made a big deal about the fact that they sold it to me this way, and that I had not made the modification. I got an attorney, which is when Mitsubishi started taking it seriously. They opted to replace the downpipe with the stock version, and in the end they fixed the problem. I'm legally obligated to say that we "settled the matter".
After having to pay for an attorney that you shouldn't have needed to.
Nothing has a warranty unless you have an attorney to enforce it
@@michaelwilkening8542the vast majority of lemon attorneys work on contingency, so there was not a dime out of my pocket, thankfully.
They can partially and completely void a warranty. I worked for GM and did it many times. It's something to be done with EXTREME caution though, because if you don't have an ironclad reason for why you did it WITH PROOF then you're going to get destroyed in court. Generally it was only done (when I worked for GM, which was a while ago) for cases like they were racing a corvette with an aftermarket tune and overrevved it - yeah we're not covering that. Another one was a guy we proved was sabotaging his oxygen sensor by using a battery cable to short it out in the hopes of getting a repurchase.
Sounds like some finance bro decided they can make $2 more per share next quarter if they just tell all their customers to pound sand tbh
@@danlorett2184 They can't, and it's not that simple. You may have done it, but you can't void an entire warranty just because of a singular action. You know those "warranty void if removed/broken" stickers on consumer electronics? Yeah, those are illegal. A Manufacturer can deny a warranty claim, but burden of proof is on them to show that the Consumer caused the problem.
In your second anecdote, a Manufacturer doesn't get to void a warranty just because a guy tried to commit fraud by purposefully damaging a single component of the warranted product. The Manufacturer can deny the claim to replace the part, but GM doesn't suddenly get to decide that they won't replace that guy's radio when it dies in a year. That just isn't how warranties or the MMWA work. What you were instructed to do is federally illegal, though only a civil matter. What you were doing is marking it as voided internally, but if the Consumer were to fight that, they'd likely prevail. The problem is that it's on the Consumer to force the Manufacturer to fulfill their burden under the law.
Even the cheapest bargain basement tires one can buy today are typically S or T rated, which are both well beyond 85 mph.
I was just telling my wife that I have never seen a tire in Discount Tire that was rated below 98MPH. Most tires were either 108 or 118 MPH.
The OEM Corolla tires are either V or H rated, 130 or 149. 85 shouldn't be an issue.
Even 20 years ago I used the CHEAPEST tires and I never had any rated less than 100mph.
I know back in the day spare tires shouldn’t be pushed faster than 50-60, but that was also, like, 15+ years ago.
@@pyrotempestwing I believe any speed limitations on spare tires primarily come from their size. Full-size spare tires are usually the exact same rim and tire as were used for the four installed on the vehicle at the factory. Donuts, on the other hand, are made much narrower with a different rim and can't safely handle the same speeds or be safely used for long distances.
I drove 90 mph in a v6 Chevy silverado..... it didn't blow up. This is quality engineering folks
2 cars out of how many, I garuntee if you look at every single car … a small percentage have a big failure. Let’s use our brains next time.
My Silverado blew up at 90k miles and I changed the oil religiously
Dude do you have any remote understanding of the concept of an anecdote and why, in your example especially, it makes for a very flawed argument
I drove 115 in the 3 cylinder from gm, my car all good
@@theopbeast4854 the car was a paid actor bro
Thanks for the video! Toyota is just not the company they used to be...
You asked for it, you got it, Toyota.
Japanese
Toyota has been wildly overrated for the last 15 years.
@@MUCKFOOT399 Japanese Yen carry trade caused Toyota to fall.........
so every Toyota on a Michigan interstate is out of warranty in their eyes
What they're saying is they won't honor their warranty because, uh... , reasons.
Yeah, some interstates in a few other states are posted at 85mph speed limit. Imaging having your warranty denied because you... drove the speed limit!
Yes
That's just in the slow lane!
Only if it was 88 Miles an Hour.... The Meme's that could be made
Great Scott
Toyota doesn't want to be in that movie it seems.
"Your tires weren't speed rated for the speed you were going." WARRANTY DENIED
Which is interesting because the cheapest tires included with a base model Corolla L and LE comes with tires rated for 85 mph.
Great Scott! Toyota is just looking out for the consumers. At 85 miles per hour, the flux capacitor begins to engage and will send you back to the future at 88 miles per hour.
Yeah, they don’t want us to go back to the ‘90s when Toyota’s were actually bulletproof.
I didnt realize Toyotas came with their own onboard supply of plutonium.
@@hancocki
They don't. You have to go "obtain" that yourself from your local Toyota nuclear facility.
Thanks Doc!
Where can I get hold of one of these Toyotas? I would LOVE to go back to the 90s! 😊
For those who don't know the GR Corolla is a high performance variant of the Corolla. 300hp, AWD, manual only. Similar to the Subaru STI and Ford Focus RS. It is advertised as a track ready car. Also Toyota provides a complimentary track experience and discounts for track related items for new GR car owners. The GR Corolla should have zero issues going fast on the highway.
It's a freaking sports care, what are they doing?
For anyone that is not familiar, the Toyota Corolla gr is a high-performance model. It's a hatchback with 300 horsepower.
ANd as such, it will have speed rated tires. With 23,000 miles, the tires would still be the originals, so Toyota is talking shit.
The Michelin Pilot Sport 4S tires that come stock on the Toyota GR Corolla have a speed rating of Y. This means they are rated for speeds up to 186 mph (300 km/h).
They're such junk. We overheated the transfer case in about 5 minutes on track and after an hour on the dyno decided there was no way we were adding one to the shop fleet.
And the engine is rated for a top speed of 143mph/230kph based on the Toyota spec sheets used for sales, so no issue there either.
@@forbeshutton5487 No, no, Toyota wants you to pony up the extra cash for "better" tires from the dealer at a 50% markup from what any independent tire dealer would charge.
Going car shopping this weekend. Thanks for the heads up.
This story reminds me of why my (former) husband quit being a shade tree mechanic.... He worked almost entirely on friends' cars, and I witnessed one woman say, "Hey, last week you put a new battery in my car, and now the brakes don't work. What did you do to my car??" (And she was serious!)
OMG
Some people are just dumb layman. I would just tell that woman to go somewhere else. Keep helping the others that you can.
Reminds me when my buddy started out in the automotive business in mid 90's working for Speedy Oil Change. One lady complained that changing her oil caused a rattle in her dash. She was dead serious and livid.
@@sassyQueen-cr5dqsome are just dumb but some are trying to scam free parts and labor.
No insurance and whack-a-doodle customers trying to lowball me are precisely why I never did "side work" during my 38 years as a mechanic. Never do "paid work" for family or friends, it rarely ends well.
Sounds like an NHTSA investigation for a possible recall of all of those models.
saldy crager
Have any others done this or had similar things happen? They don't just investigate things because of one vehicle.
REEEEEEeeeeeEEEEEE Salt is legion!
why? Because ONE vehicle had an issue?
When they started down the tire route, i figured they were going to try and claim the owner had smaller tires, causing the engine to overspeed to maintain 85mph. Rather, the seem to imply their OEM tires are actually suited for lawnmowers/go-carts.
That would be funny but really it's only about 4 to 8 mi an hour difference. And any legal circumstances in arguing this mathematic equation in miles per hour, there has to be a 10 to 15 mph tolerance because no speedometer is perfect
@@TravisEastlick-l6z "And any legal circumstances in arguing this mathematic equation in miles per hour, there has to be a 10 to 15 mph tolerance because no speedometer is perfect."
Close, but no.
"Federal standards for speedometers in the United States require that they be accurate to within 5% of the actual speed, or plus or minus 2.5%. For example, at 60 miles per hour, a speedometer should read no more than 1.5 miles per hour higher or lower than the actual speed. This requirement is found in 49 CFR §393.82."
The reason for the error, tire size, gearing, etc., is irrelevant.
I could be wrong, but, don't modern go-carts go 85 MPH or better?
The speedometers and odometers assumes proper tire size, so of you havr wrong size tires, the speed reading will be wrong. What the car really reads is the rotation of the axles, and convert it to speed and distance.
@@tonymouannes The majority of modern cars employ the ASB wheel speed sensors for the speedometer/odometer. Either way tire size is a factor.
If Toyota’s aren’t capable of 85 mph they seriously need a redesign. My MINI JCW Roadster probably isn’t supposed to go over 85, but it does quite frequently. In fact while living in Arizona I once told the MINI service writer there was something wrong with the car’s speedometer as it continually became “stuck” in the triple digits. He immediately delved into his computer looking for a service bulletin addressing the problem. Several minutes later he just smiled at me.
If a performance Toyota sports car can't do 85.... that thing probably does 85 in third.
What do you expect from a engine that a 3 cylinder 1.6l of course has to have a turbo to put out 300HP. Any engineer or technical savvy person will likely know why the engine failed. Let just say they put a massively undersize engine and using the turbo to compensate pretty much. The engine wasn't design to handle that type of power for long term. It a new way for these companies to cut costs. Pretty much look at GM with the 1.4L engine and turbo early on especially. All those engines pretty much failed around 100k mark if not earlier for the same reasons early revisions and course turbo itself like to fail as well. The same chevy cars with the naturally aspirated 1.8L without the turbo last way longer with way less repairs seen some with over 240k on the odometer without major repairs needing to be done.
I had an '83 Supra. Within the warranty period but 100 miles overdue for an oil change, driving along at the speed limit on the Interstate, it started clattering and before I got to an exit it threw a rod. Toyota wouldn't fix it, claiming it was overdue for an oil change, so I shelled out the 5 grand for a new engine. Well, another 15,000 miles on it threw another one. I sold it for scrap and bought a used Corvette on the basis that it was impossible to do $5000 worth of damage to a 1984 Chevrolet V8. Put 120,000 miles on that 'Vette with no major issues (needed a new alternator once, that's about it). Based on Toyota's recent reputation, I was thinking about forgiving them and getting another one. Nope. Not gonna do that, looks like they haven't changed.
Those early to mid '80s Supras were great looking and great driving cars, when they weren't broken. But there's a reason why you never see them anymore. Once they got some miles on them, the cost of keeping one roadworthy would quickly exceed its value.
I’ve always admired the second generation Supra (Celica Supra) and would be happy to pick up a used one, but I wasn’t aware they had engine issues. 😢
@@DragPakMerc
Are they truly that bad? Just engine issues or overall?
Should have talked to a lawyer
@@michaelallen1432 Why? At that point, he was overdue to required maintenance for the warranty. A good fight is a good fight, but if you like your warranty - better stick to the maintenance schedule and document it.....otherwise you have no chance in court.
This is what happens when you ask ChatGPT to void someone's warranty without doublechecking whether or not it makes sense
Yeah this really does sound like some sort of copy/pasted AI generated denial.
In Texas we have toll roads where you can legally drive 85 mph. Thus, I can't see how Toyota can justify denying a claim when that speed is legal in certain areas.
They now need to post SPEED limit 85 mph
Except for Toyota
Toyota SPEED
55 mph
@@ThomasWalker-m2y
I cant wait for the memes 😂😂
In Texas there are roads where it unsafe to drive under 85 mph.
The tyres must have a speed rating based on the max speed the car is capable, not the speed limit. That's is why they are so expensive on performance cars, even if you never drive at 150mph.
Speed limits do not destroy engines
A good demonstration of ONE of the reasons I never buy new cars anymore.
Funny, my 30 year old 300,000 mile Volvo is driven mostly on the turnpikes and sustains a smooth happy 85mph every day without ever blowing up or catching fire.
What's your take on V70R Volvo wagons?
@@rgt33
I’ve had one, great cars, love how they drive….the 5 cylinder engines are really good and reliable, when well kept up. They are a bit more complicated and finicky than the the old simple RWD bricks like I currently drive so they require more maintenance.
Main reason I don’t have one anymore, but still fantastic cars when decently looked after. 😊
@VolkswagenNut1969 that's what I hear. Also looking at P3 XC70 T6. 300hp sleeper. Engine is a straight 6 3.0 turbo.
Another case of “we have inspected ourselves and found nothing wrong”
"Cannot duplicate concern" 😂😂😂😂
No, they said there was an internal engine failure. They're just not paying the claim.
@@lb9gta307 yes, based off wording they “interpreted” as “we are not at fault”
An automobile burning on the side of the road is known as a Car-B-Que.
Seen quite a few of those while I was living in the Atlanta area.
Yes, super common in Arizona. On every highway, there's evidence of a car fire on the shoulder every 100 yards or so
LOL😂
Funny
In 1990 I bought an '87 Toyota Tercel. About six months after purchasing it, I was pulling up to my house and noticed some smoke coming out of the steering column, then through a seam in the column cover I could see a small flame. I jumped out of the car and within no more than 15 seconds the entire interior of the car was engulfed in 20 foot flames. It was a great little city commuter, until it wasn't.
That's just insane. What if you'd parked in a garage! I used to have a mid 80s Honda Accord. Just went on and on. Kept it until it was ~20. Guess I'm not switching to Toyota.
That letter was 100% written by chatgpt.
Toyota, they make good products most of the time. When they fail they use that rep to blame the owner. This has happened more than once.
No, they don't make good products. What they do is spend billions in advertising to make you think that. People are so brain washed, and pressured by the fan bois online, they can't admit Toyotas are not good cars.
I've worked for Ford, Chevy, Toyota and Subaru. Toyota is by far the best brand in reliability, usually it's only major problems that come through the shop. At Ford and Chevy, everything broke and we had full parking lots 24/7
I came here to say that. I owned two and one was a Highlander and the front break locked up and caught on fire. They tried to say i rode the brakes even though the other three brakes had no wear. i only had 200 miles on a brand new car less than a month old. Never bought a Toyota again. They did find a bad brake line and finally replaced only after my attorney called them.
@@donwyoming1936 I am an old man. Have owned and worked on many vehicles. Toyota by far engineers and builds its products with reliability as a very high priority. Many of the push back issues people face is not Toyota the company but individuals that through experience know how consistently reliable the vehicles are suppose it has to be the user's fault. Most of the time they are correct. I contradict your "they do not make good products" statement strongly.
It has to be that Japanese legal system's "guilty until proven innocent" mentality.
WOW the most messed up thing from the original article " For passenger car tires, the lowest widely-available speed ratings are S, which is capable of handling 112 mph, T, which features an upper threshold of 118 mph, or H, which is good up to 130 mph. "
" As confirmed in the official Toyota press picture above, the GR Corolla Core and Circuit Edition trims come from the factory on (Y)-rated Michelin Pilot Sport 4 summer tires that are good for more than 186 mph. "
Doesn't matter if the tires are not the original tires the car came with. Granted most any normal replacement tire should be more than capable of speeds in excess of 85mph but there are some oddball sizes that just aren't available except as offroad use only trailer tires or something like that. I'm sure none of that applies here but it is something to keep in mind
We need to get this comment boosted towards the top. It’s really quite telling of Toyotas awareness that they’re in the wrong
I took a quick look at the tires that come on that car between 2020 to current year - The lowest rating tire in the options was S rated at 112 MPH, but most were rated well above that.
This car is a GR Corolla, which only has 2023/2024 model years. It’s a performance-oriented version with Michelin Pilot Sport 4 tires that are Y rated for 186+ mph.
@@AFTER_MIDNITEwell perhaps it's this guy's optometrist that needs to be in the hot seat because he failed to see something going wrong with this car and failed to take proper measurements to save China some money.
@@AFTER_MIDNITE Yeah, I was looking for the lowest rating on any tire they offered. The lowest was S rated. Their speed concern on the tires doesn't apply at all in this case.
@@JohnD-JohnD
Ah, okay. 👍
@@JohnD-JohnD Yeah for passenger vehicles you can't buy anything lower than S
Thank you so much for posting this…it is Sunday August 11, 2024. I have been test driving Sedans and have settled on two. The Toyota Crown Sedan or The Audi A6. After a conversation with my wife last night we had decided to go with the slightly less expensive Toyota
But after seeing this ….now I have changed my mind
and Monday after work I’ll be purchasing the Audi. Who would have thought that Toyota would act in such a despicable manner toward what is most likely a loyal customer.
Wow. Audi is a money pit. Good luck.
Mmm... Sadly you saw the bad news, then went to someone even worse 😅
Audi puts design flaws on the market and won’t stand behind their products. Look into the oil consumption issues with the 2.0T. My son’s Q5 got an engine rebuild. My other son’s A4 is a year newer, and was not in the class action. He burns a quart every 700 miles. My son’s Q5 is having transmission issues because they put the circuit board in the trans fluid, and it’s deteriorating.
Former Audi owner here. It was a piece of garbage.
GR Corollas have been blowing up like crazy. 300hp out of 3 cylinders only lasts so long.
I recommend suing the sh*t out of Toyota. If I were on the jury, I'd award $100M punitive damages.
For a blown up Corolla ? 😆🤣😂. Pretty sure seeking those damages would get you laughed out of court.
@@jamesgeorge4874 For a Corolla, time without the use of owned property, emotional damage, and being lying jerks.
@@jamesgeorge4874 You're forgetting the time someone spends fighting it, the hardship, the costs, the emotional toll of fighting over years while you have to pay for another car......sure, not 100M but also not nothing
You can't just make up whatever frivolous number you want. It has to be substantiated in a court of law. Are you 15 or something?
100m lmao wtf?? 😂😂😂
The GR Corolla has only been available for a couple years. This car would’ve been fairly new, and probably under warranty.
If Toyota is making the case that they car was used at a track day (and possibly crashed while blowing the engine), the there is no warranty - track use voids it for virtually all manufacturers.
I worked at a Chevrolet dealership years ago. I remember seeing order sheets that stated if you ordered a ZL1 427 in a Corvette, it would come with "No Warranty" stickers. Hardly anybody could ever afford that engine anyway back then!
I guarantee this is what happened. The same thing happened to my daughter's 4Runner, and 10 other cars I have seen. There are certain parts in the engine that are made of a white plastic that break off and end up in the oil flow. Once it clogs the uptake, there is no lubrication on the crank, and it blows a hole in the side of your block. It is always catastrophic, dramatic, and sometimes causes fire because of hot combustible liquids hitting hot surfaces with plenty of air flow to support combustion.
Yay plastic! Material of the space age!
Oh. So like the modern mower engines and transmissions that have been self destructing under normal use.
Or the oil change place forgot to put new oil in or there was existing damage from the prior accident.
What year 4Runner?
1984
Even S-rated tires are 112mph capable. T- and H-rated are even higher. GR Corolla probably come with tires that are rated for twice the 85mph Toyota claimed it should be able to be driven at.
You have to really search for tires, that aren't rated for over 85. Maybe tires designed for a trailer.
From what I hear, Michelin Pilot Sport 4S is what they come with from the factory, Y speed rating (186 MPH), so.. actually more than twice.
@@BCNeil Even many many years ago when I bought the cheapest tires I could find as a 17 year old, I can't ever remember seeing tires rated less than 98mph, usually 118 even for the cheap 30k mile warranty tires.
I guess Toyota was afraid if they hit 88mph the car would go back in time.
That would be so cool. I would drive to Texas to experience that!😎
*WARNING:* Driving your Car at 88mph MAY cause Time Travel…
If he had driven just 3 mph faster he could go back and prevent it from happening
A Corolla lacks the amount of stainless steel required for the flux capacitor to interact with the plutonium power source.
Great scott
That's how you see this kind of serious shit.
@@Steamrunner, where can you find a genuine Flux capacitor? I believe O'Reilly has one on their website!
I despise all these companies that say we "CAN'T" or "CANNOT" help you. Yes the CAN. They simple CHOOSE not to.
If they were honest they would state it that way: "Sorry we choose not to help you." Or, "We will not help you."
Toyota used to be an amazing product. My grandparents swore on their lives they'd never have anything except a Toyota. Unfortunately like many manufacturers Toyota seems to have lost what made them known as a reliable car company and chased profits instead of maintaining their brand
My father swore that he'd never have a foreign vehicle until the buyback under the Obama administration. My parents suddenly each had a Toyota! 🤦♀️🤷♀️
Lol my grandparents also were fans….they called all the cars “The Toyota “ too 😂❤
Toyota outsources most of their cars nowadays, similar to other manufacturers.
I think something happened since Covid where their quality went way down. Could be a combination of that and poor leadership (similar to what’s happened to Boeing).
It's not "profit chasing." It's just bad management.
Toyota talking about tires & operated speed. Then refusing warranty on the engine. Is as ridiculous as a restaurant saying they're not responsible for food poisoning you. Cause of the speed you ate the poisonous food. The issue would be the food, not the speed. Just as the issue is the engine, not the tires.
Toyota are calling his bluff !! Sue us if you dare !
Also, Steve is 100% correct. If Toyota is denying his warranty, they must specify, IN DETAIL, why..
I haven't seen tires rated less than 100mph in years. Except for boat trailers and such - you know stuff you can't legally take over 55 or 65mph.
I guess you have never looked at big tires on lifted pick up trucks load range E designed for hauling weight, OR 18 wheeler tires! That's MILLIONS of tires. How is your seeing eye dog doing?
You can still get H-rated (85mph max) tyres. They're cheap and nasty, but they're available.
@@aussiebloke609 true I suppose you can find them, but you'd have to go out of your way... probably to Les Schwab or something.
I think the GR Corolla came out in March of 2022.
Toyota has a 3/36 bumper to bumper and 5/60 engine/powertrain warranty.
Based on this and the mileage you mentioned, This car should have still been under warranty.
The warranty is for 10 years.
I saw that video!
He wasn’t beating on that car at all when it started going downhill .
In many western states, the Interstate speed limit is 80 . In Texas, on at least one road, it's 85.
The warning has to do with tire rating, not an inherent problem with the engine.
Don’t forget Europe either. Where 130 kmh is common place not to forget Germany with the autobahn. Toyota not covering those speeds means there not be able to sell anything in Europe either.
I actually saw the dashcam video in question 3 days ago. Dude was just cruising when the engine detonated. I was honestly impressed with:
(1) - His calm demeanor throughout the video
(2) - How fast the fire spread
(3) - How long the dashcam kept rolling
1- thank you! I was internally panicking and questioning my life
2- how quick it spread made me feel very lucky I hadn’t made it home and into my garage
3- Nexar sent me a new camera because of the video. Gave me their best model for free plus $200 Amazon gift card. And even though I’ve technically been paid to say this, I have to admit they’ve really improved the user interface. It’s super easy to use and connect to as long as it’s not a faulty camera.
@@wolf-eat-tiger Hey what's up again! :D
@@wolf-eat-tiger Make sure you get Toyota to reimburse you. That denial is load of crap and they know it. We all know it!
"your engine blew up because the tires aren't speed rated" Sounds like a Karine Jean-Pierre answer.
They were definitely throwing shit at the wall to see what would stick and hoping he wouldn't be smart enough to call their bs
It sounds like Toyota's response was written by an AI chat bot.
💯
I knew it was "off" but couldnt place it, youre exactly right! Uncanny valley.
There's a road in the UK that if you drive down people abuse you from the side of it. They shout "you're in idiot", "you can't drive", "your car is rubbish", and they even say mean things about your looks and weight. It's a troll road.
ROFLMFAO
That's a horrible pun....
lol
-facepalm- 🤦 *groan*
They've treated several of the GR86 owners horribly as well--e.g. saying using the car at a track day nullified the warranty; hilariously, a complimentary track day and 1-year NASA membership were included with the purchase of the car!!! You cannot make this up. They only ever relent if the owner goes to a publication and they make a big public stink about it and humiliate Toyota. I'm THRILLED that when I upgraded my 2013 FR-S to a new 86 in '22, I went with a BRZ instead of a GR86. Admittedly, it was entirely because Toyota refused to let me customize a car to my preferences and tried to foist a crappy AT model off of me, while Subaru let me config everything exactly to spec and put in a PO over the phone in less than 20 minutes, but the fact Subaru isn't out here ducking every single warranty claim like they think they're in 'The Matrix' is a pretty nice bonus.
I think Steve did a couple videos on that; one where they denied the warranty claim because he was racing, and one when they walked it back because of the blowback. Over the last few years, Toyota's had a real problem with 'act now, think about how the buyers will react later'.
I would have thought Toyota learned from the whole GR86 media blowback. Apparently not. Subaru generally seems to have been reasonable about the whole thing for the BRZ.
Glad I never had to use the warranty on my Legacy GT, hope the same goes for my WRX. Subaru has a lot of goodwill to burn on me.
That Toyota letter arguments, holds no water. I would like to see trying that in a court hearing. Probably the company attorney fees will make the case more complicated than honoring the services.
I almost went up in flames due to a brazed high pressure fuel rail failing at the brazed connection. 1500 psi 91 octane geyser under the hood, was lucky none of it found an ignition source. I was only driving 70 though.
That's how YOU caused the failure. If you had kept your speed up, the fuel would have been pushed into the cylinders and not overpressurized the fuel rail. Warranty denied.
@@kensherwin4544 I guess that would also make starting the car void the warranty so that checks out.
This sounds like they got some AI to write the email after scanning various man made emails of refused warrenty repairs.
Sounds like the scam from dealers that sell used car lifetime powertrain warranties, provided you get their oil changes AND tire rotations (even if you just bought a new set of tires). Without the tire rotation you might not get your transmission repaired under warranty. In fact, it voids your warranty! Ask McClusky Chevrolet in Cincinnati!
Redline is generally the maximum permitted engine load and speed. The yellow arc or band on the tach (if it exists) is to be avoided in continuous use, such as climbing a 10 mile long hill in a fully loaded vehicle. Other that that, the engine operating loads are within design limits, anywhere anytime anyplace at any throttle position. 2500RPM, 4000RPM, etc. Climbing that hill puts way more load on the eng than 85 cruise.
Interesting... Austin TX I-35 bypass (toll road) is 85 mph. That's literally a legal speed limit.
Harking back to a Toyota commercial - Toyota "Oh What a Feeling!"
The bad press is going to hurt more than the cars value.
Except all the manufacturers are the same. The cars are engineered to last just enough past the warranty so that any claims they have to pay don't eat into profits too much. They might lose some business from people that now think Brand X has better quality, but as long as that's less than the number that keeps buying Toyota because they perceive a better initial value, then Toyota won't care. Very few people keep new cars past the warranty/finance period, so manufacturers don't design cars to last longer than that, ensuring people buy a new car every 5 years or so.
You go to the doctor with chest pains and he tells you're feeling them because you didn't shave that morning. Shame on Toyota!