What makes Toyota and Honda are the only best brands? Why?

My friend said other jap brands like Nissan, Mitsubishi and Mazda are the most unreliable and junk. Do you think is this true? Would you recommend those makes?

How about Subaru reliability?

Your friend is a little off base, so don't listen. However, reliability depends on exactly what years and models you might be asking about, and if you're considering a used car that is out of warranty, owner maintenance and driving habits have more to do with expectations of reliability than which manufacturer made it. I've been driving a 2012 Nissan Frontier since new and it has had ZERO problems and it's my second one. The first was a 2007 model and it had zero problems for the 5 years I owned it before getting a newer one. Subaru ranks 5th in overall reliability of ALL the major manufacturers in the past 10 years, ahead of all European and American cars. The 2016's were rated VERY reliable. The 2017's have reported 20% more problems than 2016.

Nissan and Mitsu are not Japanese anymore, they are French. And most ALL are built in China now, also.

Your friend is full of hot air. There are surveys in the motoring press that rate cars in different ways. Do that research rather that listen to dumbos.

My Nissan Quest is in great shape after 19 years.
My 1982 and 1990 Subarus totally rusted out after 12 years.

I take issue with the reliability of Hondas. For at least two decades any Honda, if it lasted long enough, would probably suffer from a bad Main Relay (fuel pump relay). They just let the owners suffer. The big problems started around 1998, with the first years of the Great Honda Automatic Transmission Debacle of 1998-2004. Owners were replacing their automatic transmissions as many as three times, and the 2003 Accord had it bad enough to rate the second worst vehicle in the carcomplaint.com database. In 2006 Civic engine blocks had a rash of cracks; around 2008 Accord rear brakes wore so badly some owners were having the rear brakes replaced when they changed the oil. In all these cases Honda simply didn't care enough to make it better.

Not sure, I bought a Mazda in 88, went 14 years without an issue.

Toyota and Honda are no longer what they used to be. Their quality control peaked in the 80s and 90s and have slipped since then. Back then Toyota and Honda recalls were close to non-existent. In the last 15-20 years, you've got the unintended acceleration recall, Honda's automatic transmission issues, those air bags that don't work properly, and a bunch of other issues. Also, I get the feeling that they actually cared more about their products in the past. I laughed my *** off when my friend showed me his second gen Honda Fit which happened to come with Firestone tires. Also, the current Toyota iA is a rebranded Mazda. Toyota seems to have forgotten what it made it's reputation on. In addition, they made all sorts of cool stuff like from the Honda Prelude to the Toyota Supra. Granted, yes as a mechanic, Toyotas and Hondas are super easy to work on.

As for other Japanese makes, excluding Nissan, they just don't have the same R&D budget. I actually like Mazda. They actually put in the effort to make their cars look good while maintaining a reasonable level of reliability. The same goes for Subaru where it found a niche market and stuck with it. As for Nissan, I have mixed feelings about them. The build quality is sloppy at times. The only reason I would want one is if I were looking for a sports car. As for Mitsubishi and Suzuki, they may be okay, but the amount of dealer support you can get in North America is pathetic.

Mitsubishi and Subaru's are good rides. I'd pass on a Mazda though. Nissan's are nice rides but too technical for most people to work on.

They aren't. My Honda ate a valve.

That's why I bought a Mazda 323. I'm impressed that they tried with the rotary engine, no one else bothered. Plus a friend had a triumph, saab, fiat and B 2000. Guess which one always ran?

Had the Mazda 12 years. Would still have it but crashed it.