Like to see -

VE Commodore GLOVEBOX -v- FG Falcon GLOVEBOX

That would be a good test and we can finally see who is the God of GLOVEBOX’s

Cheers

F-0

i cant remember how long the TAFE guys have been helping out for though…..

They may be safe enough to drive but for one noone would buy a car known to be in an ANCAP crash test, plus the costs to repair those cars would be more than to buy another one.

Some of the cars the TAFE boys get on a Thursday or Friday Arvo look like they’ve been ripped open with a can opener yet they manage to get the car back in shape with all the sponsors logos etc on them etc in time to make it on to the grid on Sunday morning – and most of them still manage finish the race [if not complete at leat 75%]

By the way those cars are pretty much right offs after the test and noone in their right mind would purchase a repaired one. The undamaged parts are stripped and sold to wreckers or destroyed depending on the policy of the manufacturer.

It is a little odd when considering when ANCrAP crash tested the VE Commodore; Holden only provided 4 cars because the rest of production was being sent to dealers as demo models prior to its release.. and they passed the first 4 tests.. [100% sucess]
Then in the same series of tests Toyota provided 5 Aurions they failed the final pole test [80% success]
However; due to a loop-hole in ANCrAps regulations Toyota were able to provide extra cars to do the tests which they did it took an extra 2 cars to pass the last test and get a marginally higher better rating than the VE Commodore

I believe car companies shouldn’t have to pay to provide the cars to ANCrAP.. it should be the Insurance Companies as they use the data more inorder to calculate repair csts and set premiims etc.
The cars could then be donated to TAFE Colleges around Australia for Automotive Apprentices to rebuild and repair; which they then sell at Auction.
That way it becomes a tax deduction for the insurance companies and can provide TAFE colleges with extra funding

Above poster, so can I buy a brand new Avalon? NO. Might I add we are talking mainly reliability here, I want to see a decent source with some decent support which shows Toyotas aernt reliable.

Pros: None
Cons: A ver bland looking car with poor handling and lots of squeeks and rattles from bad quality control. Engine uses lots of petrol (about 14L/100km)
Overall: If you like driving bland and uninspired cars and believe that a car is simply to get you from A to B and that its not about enjoying the ride, then this cars is for you. This car is really mediocre from its poor exterior styling to the handling which gives almost no feedback to the driver. The interior is boring and plain, with seats that are to soft and give nearly no support to the very poor quality stereo system with speakers which crackle all to often while they are in use. THe build quality is average and there is lots of rust on mine and i never go near the beach, plus the constant rattle i have had since new, which the dealer states it is normal for this car and refused to do anything about udner warranty.

Fact is Toyota are NOT the reliable, well built vehicles you claim they are. Camry/Aurion interior plastics are the worst of all the large locals, let alone European makes.
Cost cutting with Toyotas is also laughable, skinny tyres on practically every car, no ESP on Corolla, poor door alignment on Aurion/Camry’s, LIVE AXLE ON PRADO AND LANDCRUISER!! Very modern indeed..
THEY ARE ALL FACTS! You work for Toyota and therefore will rubbish other makes.

YOUR POSTS ARE MEANINGLESS DRIBBLE WITH NO CREDIBILITY.