Are Australian Fords REALLY so bad?

[Crazy Dazz]

The “Toyota Corollas are Wonderful/ Reliable” Mythology has been around for a LONG time, and being perfectly honest I'm blowed if I can understand how it got started when it did. I remember back in the early 80’s when Mum was buying a new car, and a couple of years later when I was buying my first serious car. The Mazda 323, Nissan Pulsar, Mitsi Colt, (I think whatever Holden were flogging) and the Laser she bought were all “modern” FWDs, with OHC engines around 1.5 or 1.6l. Toyota were still flogging their decade old RWD with its rubbish side cam 1.3. It had less room, less features, was less economical, yet cost more, and people still lapped it up. Mum STILL wanted to buy one because she had heard they were “so reliable” and we had to practically drag her to the Ford dealer.
I was looking at 2nd hand cars, mostly XC’s for around $3k, I could have had a really nice Fairmont GXL for $4k, yet equivalent Corollas were going for $5k, and they were junk. On average a bit older (7~8 years) with clapped out engines, interiors falling to bits, and rusting like there was no tomorrow. (Don’t get me started on the Datsun offerings from the same period.)
PS: That reminds, I need to go and punch my brother, because HE talked me out of buying an XB Coupe for $3,600.

[302 XC]

The offerings from Toyota in the 70s and 80s had engines as reliable and robust as todays I6 falcons
As like the falcon engines wreckers couldnt sell em because none needs them,just like the 3K.4K Toyota engines were back in the day
For a little engine they had more offerings standard than what ford and holden were flogging at the time
2 barell carbs on 4 pots, gee it was an option to get a 2 barell carb fitted to a 6 pot holden or ford,or standard on a sporty version ...
The early 4 pot corolla donks were near indestructible,ask me how I know .....
Even the Nissan 6s of the 70s were leap years ahead of the junk we got thrown at us from our aussie makers
The Nissan L series donks ,early 70s , OHC two barell carb,that great ,robust,reliable went in everything from the Z cars, to the 4x4s
The Nissan diesels,well another milestone for reliability and robustness,fitted in 4x4 s and same donks fitted in trucks
I toyed around with holden reds when younger,and now toy with Nissan L series,they are far superior than a holden red

[ryeman]

A frantic mate of mine used to valve bounce in first with a cold corolla 1.3 just getting out of the Tulla car park without so much as a puff of smoke....indestructible

[DJM83]

Cant be too bad, sales dont lie.

We have a 12 corolla ascent sport in our garage. So far so good, but its pretty gutless.

[GREGL]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

On average a bit older (7~8 years) with clapped out engines, interiors falling to bits, and rusting like there was no tomorrow. (Don’t get me started on the Datsun offerings from the same period.)
PS: That reminds, I need to go and punch my brother, because HE talked me out of buying an XB Coupe for $3,600.

Back then anyone could have got a GT for around that money among other now very desirable cars. Maybe he didn't want you to buy a rust bucket , because by then that 7 to 8 year old falcon would have had issues UNLESS it was well cared for . Just like a equivalent jap car/holden/valiant of the same era .
Those 80's corollas while bland and underpowered certainly were fun redlining they didn't mind a rev unlike the oz sixes.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by wildrider

and because people aren't going too keep a car past 300,000kms doesn't make a good argument to say a V6 magna is the better engine. If anything that would prove the falcon 6 is better as there is a lot of falcon 6s from those days pushing 300,000kms plus still on the roads. I'm not saying the manga's a bad car. all I am saying is that you wont get that durability from a magna V6 that the falcon 6 has. just because a cars running well at 250,000kms doesn't mean it still will be running well at 300,000kms. a lot can go wrong in 50,000kms especially with a 10 year old car

I'm not implying that the Magna engine is anywhere near as durable as the Falcon i6, i'm simply pointing out that they are more than adequate for the purpose they were built for.

I don't think MMAL cared wether some pimply faced 16yr old was gonna get one for $1500 as a first car when they weighed up its long term durability.
They provided a large family sedan capable of providing trouble free motoring for 10+ years, and even backed it with warranty at one stage.

I think that is a fair life expectancy in the modern era.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

The “Toyota Corollas are Wonderful/ Reliable” Mythology has been around for a LONG time, and being perfectly honest I'm blowed if I can understand how it got started when it did. I remember back in the early 80’s when Mum was buying a new car, and a couple of years later when I was buying my first serious car. The Mazda 323, Nissan Pulsar, Mitsi Colt, (I think whatever Holden were flogging) and the Laser she bought were all “modern” FWDs, with OHC engines around 1.5 or 1.6l. Toyota were still flogging their decade old RWD with its rubbish side cam 1.3. It had less room, less features, was less economical, yet cost more, and people still lapped it up. Mum STILL wanted to buy one because she had heard they were “so reliable” and we had to practically drag her to the Ford dealer.
I was looking at 2nd hand cars, mostly XC’s for around $3k, I could have had a really nice Fairmont GXL for $4k, yet equivalent Corollas were going for $5k, and they were junk. On average a bit older (7~8 years) with clapped out engines, interiors falling to bits, and rusting like there was no tomorrow. (Don’t get me started on the Datsun offerings from the same period.)
PS: That reminds, I need to go and punch my brother, because HE talked me out of buying an XB Coupe for $3,600.

Lol, and the old 'Toyota reliability is a myth' myth is just as old.

For starters the 1.3l 4K ke70 Corolla you refer to was bullet proof and Toyota continued to use the K series design in its SBV vans until at least 2001 albeit with EFi.
Those same Ke70 Corollas have a modern day cult following as the Datto 1600 did 15yrs ago.
The basic Laser of its era was 1.3l and Holden had the RB Gemini which was anything but inspiring.
I worked for Toyota from the early 90's until 02 and saw 5 evolutions of the corolla and they were great cars.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Lol, and the old 'Toyota reliability is a myth' myth is just as old.

For starters the 1.3l 4K ke70 Corolla you refer to was bullet proof and Toyota continued to use the K series design in its SBV vans until at least 2001 albeit with EFi.
Those same Ke70 Corollas have a modern day cult following as the Datto 1600 did 15yrs ago.
The basic Laser of its era was 1.3l and Holden had the RB Gemini which was anything but inspiring.
I worked for Toyota from the early 90's until 02 and saw 5 evolutions of the corolla and they were great cars.

Not disputing the overall reliability of Corollas and Toyotas in general, just saying blowed if I can understand HOW it got started so EARLY. As I said, at that time (early 80’s) Corollas were the most expensive and yet easily one of the worst cars being offered in that class.
I suppose the point is that (as you mentioned) the 1.3 side-cam was indestructible. It was gutless and thirsty, but to your average Grandma who was buying it that probably didn’t matter so much.
I suppose also, that if one went back a decade further; the (same) Corolla looked pretty good against the Escort, Gemini (?), Gallant, and Datsun (shudder) 120Y.
My point was that the reputation was already solidified by the early 80’s and persisted undeservedly.
Furthermore that this “reputation” drove people to pay way over the odds for 2nd hand cars that were already crapped out.
NB: The base model Laser manual was a 1.3 OHC, everything above that was 1.5.

As I have posted earlier, I am one of the few people that has had the opportunity to commercially evaluate this purported Toyota Reliability across a fleet of a particular model (Hilux) and compare it to a direct competitor (Navara.) On an objective measurement (downtime) the Nissans were actually more reliable, due to the cost of parts they were cheaper to maintain, and the capital cost of Hilux's was obscene.
I refer to it as “mythology” because (like so many things with cars) it is based on popular perception rather than objectivity.

Ask your average punter which is the ONLY car that for the past 40 years has been uniquely developed in Australia with an Australian designed and built engine, and the majority will answer “Holden of course.”

I would also make the point that this is not restricted to the car market, nor to uneducated bogans. Try talking to Mine Engineers and Managers about Trucks, and they all start droning “must buy Caterpillar, ‘lectric’ trucks BADDD Caterpillar Good…”
I was contracted to do a fleet comparison for a Large Nickel mine. Based mostly on the fact that Terex were prepared to cut their own nuts off to get the business, and despite the pig-headed objections of some staff, the study showed substantial cost savings and productivity improvements moving to the Terex AC trucks, but in the end they went with Caterpillar anyway because it “wasn’t worth upsetting people.”

[302 XC]

I agree ,I cant ever understand the cult following hiluxs have .....
But theres a fav saying ,"If its indestuctable its under powered"
Most hiluxs had 4 pots that couldn't rip the skin of a custard,but they kept goin and goin and goin
A mate has a hilux hasn't laid a spanner to it in 6 years,other than oil changes
Its thirsty and gutless ....
Took him for a spin in the AU ute hack,and couldn't believe something with lots more power uses less fuel than his mighty powerfull (hint of sarcasim)hilux
Its good to see that although hilux is the biggest selling 4x4 dual cab, the navara is number 2
It took me years to shake the "Gotta have a Toyota " the missus swears by,and got her into something just as good,or sometimes better,the nissans

[ryeman]

Engine apart, in the mid 70s the corolla/corona were v bland....then came the Honda Accord.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Not disputing the overall reliability of Corollas and Toyotas in general, just saying blowed if I can understand HOW it got started so EARLY. As I said, at that time (early 80’s) Corollas were the most expensive and yet easily one of the worst cars being offered in that class.
I suppose the point is that (as you mentioned) the 1.3 side-cam was indestructible. It was gutless and thirsty, but to your average Grandma who was buying it that probably didn’t matter so much.

Again, this is not true, I owned an 83 Ke70 5sp sedan, running 15" centrelines and used to deliver Pizza as a second job with it and it was as cheap as chips to run, in fact it never used more than 10l to do 100k's of continuous stop start driving per night.
It was bullet proof and efficient as I could whip around in it, it was pushed hard and I was making about $80-90 a night.
Another driver had a early Tarago which too was indestructible, the last driver had an EA on gas which ironically enough spent most of its time in the car park with bonnet up between deliveries.

I rebuilt my Ke70 ground up twice, they are simple and therefore reliable

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

I suppose also, that if one went back a decade further; the (same) Corolla looked pretty good against the Escort, Gemini (?), Gallant, and Datsun (shudder) 120Y.
My point was that the reputation was already solidified by the early 80’s and persisted undeservedly.
Furthermore that this “reputation” drove people to pay way over the odds for 2nd hand cars that were already crapped out.
NB: The base model Laser manual was a 1.3 OHC, everything above that was 1.5.

Apart from the Gemini and the 120y, the rest of the offerings weren't too bad really.
I recently had a KB 'S', single carb 1.5l Laser which I bought from a guy on this very Forum, was a brilliant little car and as tough as nails too. I on sold it to my Bro in law who is a mad Holden nut, but even he claims it is the most reliable vehicle he's owned and he's had some nice HSV's, HQ SS etc. etc.

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

As I have posted earlier, I am one of the few people that has had the opportunity to commercially evaluate this purported Toyota Reliability across a fleet of a particular model (Hilux) and compare it to a direct competitor (Navara.) On an objective measurement (downtime) the Nissans were actually more reliable, due to the cost of parts they were cheaper to maintain, and the capital cost of Hilux's was obscene.
I refer to it as “mythology” because (like so many things with cars) it is based on popular perception rather than objectivity.

I tend to agree with you on this point, I believe the Hilux has softened over the years to a point where they just don't stand up against the competition.
Early Hilux's were like the early corollas, simple and virtually bullet proof, but not so for the last 15yrs.


Look, don't get me wrong, i'm not declaring Toyota to be the be all that some make it out to be, but they certainly had earned the reputation they had.

I am not comfortable with how locally made offerings are being perceived at the moment, but im not going to drag every other manufacturer down to level up the playing field.
The fact is Ford offer 2 world class products out of their Australian division, unfortunately the punters only want 1.
If Ford wanted manufacturing to survive in this Country then Focus should have been built here.

Unfortunately you cant make people buy what they don't want.

[ryeman]

Even Toyota had issues with their first unleaded engines.

[irish2]

Originally Posted by 302 XC

The early 4 pot corolla donks were near indestructible,ask me how I know .....

I managed to break one...

Still haven't managed to break my September '64 build mustang. Stock diff, Stock C4, modified top end on stock bottom end, still going strong. Needless to say most of those parts are exactly the same as the Falcons of the time.

The 83 corolla I had was gutless, had useless brakes, and eventually dropped to 3 cylinders from snapping a con rod. Wasn't even flogged.