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)
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.
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
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 :-(.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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....
"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 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.
"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."
@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.
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.
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.
@@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 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.
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.
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.
@@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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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. 😊
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
@@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
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.
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.
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).
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.
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!
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 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.
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."
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.
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?
So many do it. You watch a 9 min video & 3 mins in, nothing of value has been said or shown. Then there's the ones who speak so slow, time is actually counting backwards. Or the ones who repeat the same thing 3 times over
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Most cars are electronically limited at a speed commensurate with the tires that ship with the car. My 2006 Land Barge has an electronic limiter at 112 and shipped with tires to match. The tires I have on it now are W, rated to 168mph
Having been In the automotive business for 45 years occasionally you run into something like this. The manufacturer can deny it all he wants but when it goes to court it comes down to the proof, and it always seems to fall on the manufacturer to prove it was the customer's fault.
That's exactly how it works. You have to prove it wasn't defects in workmanship or material that caused the problem as the manufacturer, because that's what the warranty covers.
I had a 1997 Altima with a manual transmission. After 20K miles the clutch failed. I took it in and they said it wasn't covered because it was a wear and tear item. Years later I had a 2002 Altima around the 100K mark that blew a cylinder and Nissan covered replacing the engine (with a rebuilt one). It may depend more on the individual who gets the claim than the overall company.
Riding west on I-90 across South Dakota in 2019, the speed limit was 85, and if you weren’t running 90-100 you were getting passed regularly. It happened to be bike week in Sturgis.
