There are folks driving 20 year old Land Rovers that have served them flawlessly. (I admit, not many but some!) And there are folks who have had their Toyota's at the dealership more than their driveway. Again - not many, but some!
Reliability rankings are like lottery odds. Some brands might give you better odds of getting a reliable car than others, but once you've bought your ticket, all that matters is "is it the winner or isn't it". Rigs are the same -- once you buy it, all that matters is if yours is one of the 20-year flawless rigs, or is it one of the lemons, regardless of what badge is on the front. And, as others have said, the badge makes a lot less of a difference these days than it used to seem to make.
I say "seem" because there's also a marketing/propaganda angle to this. Reliability metrics imply a fundamental quality difference in vehicles, but it does not account for owner behaviour. Toyota's reputation for reliability has been partly a marketing decision, and that marketing typically attracted a certain kind of person -- I read this a few years ago and can't find the source, but for a really long time the type of person who purchased a Toyota was also likely to be the type of person who is a stickler for maintaining their vehicle. They are attracted to the reliability of Toyota because they like having reliable things and Toyota's marketing focused on that value; and they value maintaining their equipment because again, they like having reliable things. As a result, Toyotas in North America are (according to what I read) owned by folks who tend to take better care of them. And when you take better care of something, it lasts a long time. This creates a feedback loop that further enhances Toyota's reputation for reliability, but the data is a bit skewed because of this type of owner behaviour. Other brands who do not market their reliability but instead market their ability to zoom, be fun, or be similar to rocks will attract buyers with different values who may not prioritize maintenance as much so they don't get this "owner behaviour" boon on reliability statistics.
And, other manufacturers aren't dumb - they've studied Toyotas approach and tried to replicate versions of it throughout the years, and as a result, the gap in actual quality between Toyota and other marques isn't as big as it used to be, even though the reputation is still much stronger. Toyotas I don't think have gotten worse; I just think everyone else has gotten WAY better. This is especially true with the midsize trucks -- they've been going toe to toe with the Hilux for years in the global market, and at least as far as the GM Twins go, they are WAY better quality than even their fullsized cousins. Everything from the handling to the feeling of the switches just feels more well built in my Canyon than it ever did in my Silverado, and it's interesting to me that the Canyon was a joint venture between Isuzu and GM and later Mazda - for Isuzu its the DMax, for GM it's the Twins, and for Mazda it's the BT-50. the Dmax and BT50 play in markets with the Hilux (as does the Ranger), and that fierce competition has really forced them to up their game, which our domestic midsize trucks benefit from. To @Ruff's question, I think this is what's changed in the last decade or so. Others have gotten better - I don't think Toyota has gotten worse. And
@rruff does have a good point about the longer time scale -- we know there are some million mile Tundras and Tacos, which is a testament to both their quality and their upkeep by their owners. It's a bit early days yet to see how common million mile Canyons and Rangers will be. I hope to keep mine nice enough and well maintained enough to be one of the first!
I guess in conclusion, I'll just say Toyotas are terrible and should be avoided at all costs. Now I shall sit back and enjoy the rest of this thread as the fireworks begin.
?????????????
(I'm kidding - I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is the gap is narrower than it used to be -- it's still there, but as I understand it, the gap can appear bigger because of owner behaviour which is not accounted for in reliability statistics. And more important than any of those statistics is whether you got a Monday-after-coffee car, or Friday-before-the-long-weekend car sitting in your driveway because all brands have great rigs and all brands have lemons, just in different proportions - and the difference in proportions is more slight today than it has been in the past).
