Problems with non-MG EVs

[T1 Terry]

Mmmm, a tad cynical. I'm not saying it's not true. I'd like to think not, though.

I think it is more a trade-off, by using the cheapest option that they believe will last for the warranty period that is available in bulk, they play the numbers game of failure cost v money saved compared to a better quality controlled more expensive option ........... Sometimes the old adage " You get what you pay for" is true ......
Lead acid start batteries are a perfect example ....... relying on historical reputation where batteries lasted for 10yrs, they continually reduce the quality and quantity of the materials used, but in the same size packaging, seal it so you can't see what is inside ..... and hope for the best outcome that will support the bottom line ........ Why spend $$ to preserve a reputation for quality, the very best buggy whip makers, still went to the wall with the horseless carriage's entry into the market

T1 Terry

 

[Gomev]

The accountants told them that a customer for life is no good if the car lasts a lifetime. All products these days have an inbuilt obsolescence, parts made to last just long enough to get through the warranty period. This way they sell ten cars (or TVs or washing machines or..) in a lifetime instead of just one.

Building quality built cars that last doesn't seem to have done Toyota any harm as a business.

 

[5teep]

That's not what Mr Google says Gomev.

 

[tsedge]

I had understood Toyota's reputation for reliability was no longer a reality: that their failure rates are similar to other vehicles these days.

 

[salty]

I had understood Toyota's reputation for reliability was no longer a reality: that their failure rates are similar to other vehicles these days.

Wonder if that make MG owners, feel any better.