Toyota Motor Philippines (TMP) has announced a recall of 3,416 vehicles due to an issue with the gauge cluster (Combination Meter System).
Select Alphard, Camry, Corolla Altis, and Corolla Cross models may have an issue with its 12.3-inch digital gauge cluster. Through its investigation, Toyota found a programming error wherein the system will repeatedly save unnecessary data, causing the memory to deplete sooner than expected. If this happens, the screen may not turn on when starting the vehicle and remain off. Driving without a visible speedometer or warning lights may increase the risk of an accident in certain situations.
Toyota says that reprogramming the software, or worse, the digital gauge cluster may have to be replaced. The revised software and replacement parts aren’t available as of yet, but are expected to be ready by October 2025 at the earliest.
Once repair parts are available, involved customers with vehicles included in the service campaign are highly encouraged to immediately set an appointment with any authorized Toyota dealer to perform the necessary repair and prevent problems from occurring. Customers may also schedule the repair during the Periodic Maintenance appointment if the vehicle is already due or approaching its regular maintenance schedule.
The following units are affected:
- Toyota Alphard - 2,708 units (Production date: June 12, 2023 to May 19, 2025)
- Toyota Camry – 1 unit (Production date: May 7, 2024)
- Toyota Corolla Altis – 110 units (Production date: May 30, 2023 to September 20, 2024)
- Toyota Corolla Cross – 597 units (Production date: November 2, 2023 to October 21, 2024)
Customers may also check if their vehicles are included in any active Service Campaign here.
I hope i see less people talking about toyota quality
ReplyDeleteunfortunately your hope is hopeless toyota is still the king
ReplyDeleteIn sales, definitely. But their reputation is not as pristine as before. I hope they don't turn into a "live long enough to become the villian" type deal (a bit dramatic of a statement from me, yes, but you get my point lol).
DeleteWow so many alphards sold in the Philippines. More than some ordinary models. And this is not a life or death issue like burning batteries and stalling cars in the middle of the highway
ReplyDeleteThe good thing about established Japanese vehicle brands is that they do recalls and replace the defective parts. I can’t say the same thing for Chinese brands… there may have been exceptions but it’s not the norm. No recalls doesn’t necessarily mean “quality”. It might just mean that they let their customers shoulder the cost of the defective parts…
ReplyDeleteIf you think any company can get away with not issuing recalls (forever) then you have very low trust in regulators (not just here but in other countries where the Chinese brands also sell to). It may take time to discover, but until then all you are saying is conjecture.
DeleteAnyways, it doesn't take long for word to go around if X brand's Y model is known for Z defect(s) so it's not just the absence of recalls but rather the absence of complaints over time which should be the better litmus test of quality. This is especially true for volume sellers.
"If this happens, the screen may not turn on when starting the vehicle and remain off. Driving without a visible speedometer or warning lights may increase the risk of an accident in certain situations."
ReplyDeleteThat is the problem with "modern cars". They turned a lot or reliable mechanical parts into electronic ones. Perhaps because they can no longer "make drastic improvements" to the mechanicals, so "upgrading" them into what we have today would make it look modern and state of the art. Its a compromise: Reliability vs Modernity.....only situations (i.e. recalls) would tell.
Using Toyota as an example, they believe in and practice Kaizen which is small incremental improvements so that part of your statement already doesn't apply.
DeleteIt's not just making them "look modern" but having things done through software actually streamlines a lot stuff that needed precision engineering to accomplish/implement.
There's a lot of thought about function that goes into these decisions and not just to appeal to some 'modern-looking' standard.
"It's not just making them "look modern" but having things done through software actually streamlines a lot stuff that needed precision engineering to accomplish/implement."
DeleteBeating around the bush and generalizing, but your statement did not address the compromise between Reliability vs Modernity issue in the case of this gauge cluster display failure.
Kaizen is practiced by most Japanese manufacturers not just in the automotive sector. And Kaizen (or whatever translation other country's manufacturers call it) sometimes jeopardizes a part of a vehicle because this practice forces them to continuously "upgrade" a part which aint broke, and replace it with "new tech" that hasnt been tested thoroughly. In most instances, the paying customers become the "guinea pigs", how convenient and cost-saving for your beloved manufacturers.
I didn't think I was expected to answer every part of your complaint/statement since I thought it was obvious I was addressing the part of your statement that (essentially) asserts (correct me if I'm wrong in my interpretation) the practice of 'unnecessary/forced upgrades for the sake of looking modern' and that the said "upgrades" are barely worthy of being called upgrades as evidenced by your use of quotation marks.
DeleteI was not arguing against the part of your statement that says that there is a compromise between reliability and modernity but rather against the motives you chose to present that you say drove these decisions.
But to actually discuss 'Reliability vs Modernity', it's not even limited to a hardware vs software debate. It's the nature of engineering that early implementations carry the risk of unforseen consequences. Going from a proven reliable mechanical design to a newer mechanical design that shows promise in theory has historically shown both successes and failures and many failures are either refined and become the new reliable standard or are abandoned.
Like you say, time will tell what will happen here with the specific example of gauge clusters, but take a moment to consider it is still the nature of engineering to challenge existing implementations with a newer better (on paper) approach in the form of software and it is essentially the same as the engineers of old bringing novel (back then) solutions to existing, proven, and reliable mechanisms.
You may not want to participate (and that is your right to opt out or be disappointed) in the the transition period where it may actually be that the software approach fails and is abandoned but the changes happening is NOT without adequate (engineering-based) reason or motive which is what was my point is in this discussion
I hope that (somewhat) satisfies you. And for the record, I hold no manufacturer as 'beloved' in fact you'd see me being very critical of Toyota (as deserving of their position as a market leader) if you can tell me from the way I write my comments.
"I was not arguing against the part of your statement that says that there is a compromise between reliability and modernity but rather against the motives you chose to present that you say drove these decisions."
Delete"Like you say, time will tell what will happen here with the specific example of gauge clusters, but take a moment to consider it is still the nature of engineering to challenge existing implementations with a newer better (on paper) approach in the form of software and it is essentially the same as the engineers of old bringing novel (back then) solutions to existing, proven, and reliable mechanisms."
Above statements (with jargons to mask their weakness) just gave your aguments away.....hope you enjoy paying while being a "guinea pig", cheers!
Lol. If you're labeling the plain English I'm using as 'jargon' (maybe look up the word) then you should just admit you're unable to follow the conversation and that you have no follow up (after YOU wanted YOUR main point addressed). That or you're intentionally arguing in bad faith which either way isn't worth any more of my time.
DeleteCheers to you too! (you ignorant git, lol) 😁
A person calling names to another already lost the debate.
DeleteIt has been clear from the beginning your argument is lost.
Keep telling yourself that, bud. That kind of comeback doesn't work outside of school.
DeleteMaybe take a look at the condescending tone of your previous comments and figure out that you're not as innocent as you portray yourself as.
And who cares about winning or losing in an internet forum? I was answering your points in good faith until your MVP-level evasion and you act it was a battle of wits. Lol
No recalls = possible that they are hiding something. Would rather have car brands that have issued recalls than none at all.
ReplyDeleteI am sure Chinese brands will not do that since they always want to save face, it is in their culture to do that.
The Chinese government has, on multiple occasions, made public examples of companies (of not just cars) that have created enough negative public perception through practices like hiding something they shouldn't have (or not hiding it well enough you could argue).
DeleteWhy? Because then the Chinese government would be the one to risk losing face.
Consider this, which is more important; the face of Chinese companies that are hiding (or failing to hide) such problems, or the face of the Chinese government who risk losing face by not acting on public outcry against those companies whose problems get exposed or are too common to hide? I think the answer to that is easy.
You might also say that the government can just use their censorship/propaganda machine to hide the problems from the public. But, if the problems are in people's garages (in the case of cars) and affect their daily lives then word goes around fast (yes, even in China people have standards and talk/know about which brands suck - they're people too, surprising, I know!). So, that much effort is just not worth it compared to just shaming/punishing the offenders and scaring the others to not make the government come back a second time. Plus, it makes the government look strong and effective by keeping the companies in line by not making themselves a national embarrassment (well, that's how they think anyway).
I'm not trying to paint the Chinese government as 'good guys' or even their car companies, but all I'm saying is that even in a culture like theirs there is some kind of a balancing act going on to make sure people aren't getting completely screwed.
I would rather have a recall to dealership than OTA. Especially when safety item like gauge cluster is involved. OTA is good but I prefer physical inspection of the car.
ReplyDeleteToyota should bring back their reliability. Another example is the Yaris Cross. So many things to improve like 360 cam, blindside monitor sensors [BSM], rear cross traffic alert sensors [RCTA], & others.
ReplyDelete