The timing could not have been worse for the Japanese automaker. One of the major reasons Toyota lost its title in the first place was the fiasco over uncontrolled acceleration caused by faulty floor mats. Dozens of people may have been killed because of this. Subsequent recalls and lawsuits could cost the company as much as $5 billion, and damaged its reputation enough to cause people to choose other automakers.

Recalls are actually far more common than many people realize. In the past three years alone, several thousand have taken place, although most of these affected a relatively small number of vehicles. The truly massive recalls, like the Toyota sudden acceleration issue, occur far less frequently. Of the 10 biggest recalls since the National Highway and Transportation Safety Administration began compiling data in the 60’s, only two have occurred in the past ten years.

A review of similar recalls reflects how damaging they can be to company and sales. In 2000, Bridgestone/Firestone recalled millions of tires on several of its models, including the Explorer, the most popular SUV in America at the time. The cars, equipped with Wilderness AT Firestone tires rolled over when the tire tread separated with alarming frequency, potentially causing more than 200 deaths.

Edmunds.com analyst Jeremy Acevedo explained what a disaster the firestone incident was for Ford.  “A long time leader of the segment, the Explorer’s market share dipped from 20.4% of the Midsize SUV market in 2000 to 17.8% in 2001. That would mark the beginning of the slide in market share for the Explorer that would last for several years.”

While the worst recalls on record are truly massive, affecting several million vehicles and hurting the company’s image, Acevedo explained most cases do not have the same serious negative impact. “Recalls are a part of car ownership and most make no lasting impact on consumer’s perception of the brand, or the brand’s sales.”

In 1981, after complaints of vehicles shifting out of park into reverse and injuring hundreds, the NHTSA forced Ford to take action and deal with the 21 million vehicles that could have potentially been affected by the issue. Rather than offering to fix the problem, however, Ford was permitted to send warning stickers to owners of the affected models instead. While it was the largest recall of all time, it only cost the company several million dollars — instead of several billion.

Based on data collected from the NHTSA’s recall database, 24/7 Wall St. identified the 10 biggest car recalls of all time. In some cases, a single cause had several different recall numbers while the manufacturer tried to identify the source of the issue. In those cases, we counted the different recalls were treated as a single issue. In the case of the 1981 Ford recall, while the automaker never technically issued a recall of its vehicles, it is considered by the NHTSA to be a type of recall, and we treated it accordingly.

These are the largest car recalls all time.

Read: America’s Most Reliable Cars

Vehicle reliability and repair diagnostics company CarMD’s latest annual Vehicle Health Index is a massive study conducted on thousands of different models currently on the road. Based on CarMD’s index, which measures the frequency and expense of necessary repairs, 24/7 Wall St. identified the 10 most reliable cars.

In an interview with 24/7 Wall St., CarMD director of corporate communications Kristen Brocoff explained the importance of considering both measures. The Toyota Prius rarely goes in for repairs. But when it does, the most common repair involves the hybrid battery, which can cost as much as $3,000.

Many of these brands have long-standing reputations for reliability. “What we’re seeing in our data is that, historically, there have been those sweetheart brands that everybody says are the brand of the year, the cars of the year,” Brocoff explained.

Many of the manufacturers on this list, such as Toyota Motor Corp. (NYSE: TM), Honda Motor Co. Ltd. (NYSE: HMC) and Hyundai, all score highly on CarMD’s reliability rank. This reputation helps sell vehicles.

These models have been among the best-selling in the country for years. Of the 10 cars with the best scores, six sold more than 100,000 units in 2011 and are well on track to do the same this year, including models such as the Accord, Sonata and Corolla, flagships for their respective makers. The Honda Accord, the Hyundai Sonata and the Toyota Corolla were among the top 20 selling cars in the first 10 months of 2012.

Meanwhile, sales for some of the less-popular models that made the top 10 most reliable list, such as Ford Motor Co.’s (NYSE: F) Taurus, the Honda Pilot and the Subaru Forester and Outback, are growing.

Brocoff added that some of the cars with poorer reputations for reliability may improve. “We’re starting to see with today’s technology, manufacturers are really able to make cars that will last longer than ever before. It has really evened the playing field, and there are lots of models that may not always be the names you are used to.” Brocoff  pointed to the Ford Taurus in particular as a model that has flown under the radar, but may increasingly be known as a reliable model over time.

The CarMD November 2012 Vehicle Health Index is based on more than 10 years of data from car diagnostic computers from the vast majority of 2002 to 2012 model year cars sold in the United States. Weighting evenly the average costs of repairs related to “check engine”  lights — issues identified by onboard vehicle computer accounting for roughly 80% of all problems — and how often each model was taken in for those repairs, CarMD assigned a reliability score for each model by year. 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the 10 models with the best scores. Included in our analysis were five years of car sales data for all years for each model provided by Edmunds.com. From the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) we obtained crash and rollover safety data. We also referenced J.D. Power’s vehicle dependability study. All index ranks we list are out of the 100 best-ranked cars.

These are America’s most trusted cars.

Earnings per share (EPS) for the first half of the year totaled $0.98, and the consensus estimate for the second half called for EPS of $1.11. Full-year EPS had been estimated at $2.07 on revenue of $747.6 million. The company said:

While September sales are improving, the seasonality and weakness experienced in July and August, combined with the recently announced temporary shut-down of a plug-in electric drive vehicle production facility, are expected to result in Adjusted EPS for the third quarter in the low- to mid-30-cent range.

Analysts had expected third-quarter EPS of $0.49. Polypore also said that fourth-quarter EPS would be in the “low-50-cent to low-60-cent range.” Analysts had forecast fourth-quarter EPS of $0.62.

Polypore did say that production for the plug-in electric vehicle customer would resume in September. The company also expects better sales for its lead-acid battery membranes.

Shares are down 11.7% at $31.74 in premarket trading. The stock’s 52-week range is $30.39 to $69.74.

Paul Ausick

Avis made both its forecast numbers this morning, and reaffirmed last week’s full-year EPS guidance for EPS of $2.35-2.65. Analysts didn’t believe that number either, and the consensus EPS estimate rose only to $2.11.

The lack of respect for Avis’s forecast may have been due in part to an announcement from Hertz Global Holdings Inc. (NYSE: HTZ) last Thursday that it had reached an agreement with a potential buyer of the company’s Advantage rent-a-car brand, which could clear the way for Hertz’s acquisition of Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group Inc. (NYSE: DTG). That deal has been on-again, off-again for about two years, and at one time both Avis and Hertz were bidding on Dollar Thrifty.

Like Hertz, Avis revised its fleet costs downward by 3%-8%, based on the lower depreciation rates for its fleet. Used car values have risen and that has helped both companies. Dollar Thrifty reports quarterly results next week and is expected to post EPS of $1.30, up from $1.28 just a week ago, on revenue of $355.53 million.

Shares of Avis closed down -1.3% on Friday at $15.90 in a 52-week range of $8.45-$19.24. There has been no change in the share price in the pre-market so far this morning.

Paul Ausick

According to the announcement the company plans to use the proceeds “to enhance the integration of its Fenco Automotive Products acquisition and for general corporate purposes to support the company’s growth.”

Now, $15 million is not a huge amount, but at the end of March the company reported less than $1.5 million in cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments versus long-term debt of $62.56 million. Borrowing any more was probably not an option and the unnamed buyer drove a hard bargain. Motorcar Parts had better show some positive results from this transaction or the company could be toast.

Paul Ausick

Zoltek’s CEO said:

We have long regarded the automotive industry as the largest potential user of low-cost, high-performance carbon fibers, and it is a vital part of our strategy as the largest producer of these fiber[s] to work closely with leading suppliers to the automotive industry of parts and sub-systems.

Magna, with a market cap of more than $11 billion, certainly qualifies as a leading supplier. The two companies did not provide specific details of their agreement.

Zoltek’s shares are up nearly 17% at $11.90 in a 52-week range of $5.60-$15.01.

Read: The Least Dependable Cars in America

24/7 Wall St. looked at the recently released JD Power 2012 U.S. Vehicle Dependability Study. We reviewed the auto brands that received the lowest scores. The brands with the most dependability issues were examined to determine why they received such poor marks.

The JD Power survey is based on the responses of more than 31,000 original owners of 2009 model-year vehicles after three years of ownership. Dependability is determined “by the level of problems experienced per 100 vehicles (PP100), with a lower score reflecting higher quality.” The industry’s average for the current study was 132 PP100. The worst brands had more than 160 problems.

For one, many are niche brands. Seven of the nine brands have a U.S. market share of 3% or less. Mainstream brands such as Ford (NYSE: F), Chevy and Toyota (NYSE: TM), which have closer to 15% of the market, do not make the list. Is brand reliability related to market share? There is no evidence that is true.

Some small market share brands like Lexus get high quality marks. However, the small market share brands on this list do not have anywhere near the production quality of Mercedes or Lexus. They are lower end brands with small market share.

The effects of the Chrysler Chapter 11 filing in April 2009 are obvious when looking at the list. The survey measures the dependability of cars manufactured in 2009 after three years of ownership. When the 2009 Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge models were manufactured, Chrysler was in great turmoil, including layoffs, management changes and plant closures — all of which can affect manufacturing quality. It should come as no surprise then that three of the brands on this list are part of that parent company.

The least dependable cars include nine brands that JD Powers’ 2012 Vehicle Dependability Survey lists as having the highest incidence of problems. The dependability number provided for each brand represents the number of reported defects per 100 vehicles — the higher the score, the lower the quality. Initial quality scores by brand and brand dependability scores for these automakers’ most popular vehicles also were reviewed.

Also Read: The Highest-Paid Athletes of All Time

Brand satisfaction scores from the American Consumer Satisfaction Index also were included. Most of the brands on our list ranked close to the bottom in ACSI score relative to the other automakers. We also list what we consider to be the brand’s flagship vehicle — the most recognized and usually one of the highest-selling models of the brand.

These are the least dependable cars in America.

The primary reason for the drop in US pump prices is the drop in the price of Brent crude. Because oil is fungible, a barrel of Brent crude imported by tanker to the US is now setting the price that refiners are able to charge for a gallon of gasoline. This has been the situation since the beginning of the year.

A refiner in the midwestern US does not pay the Brent price for a barrel of crude, but a lower WTI or other price discounted even further from Brent pricing. Like oil, gasoline is also fungible, and the value of the gasoline refined from those cheaper barrels is identical with the value of a gallon of gasoline refined from Brent. What economists call the “law of one price” applies here: identical goods have only one price. The price of gasoline, then, was based on the price of Brent crude and refiners charged for gasoline as if the crude input was Brent, no matter what the crude’s actual source.

The wide spread between WTI and Brent prices meant that refiners able to use WTI realized a much larger profit on every gallon of gasoline they sold. Now that the price of Brent is dropping, the spread is closing. The spread is about $11/barrel today, but it has been as low as $8/barrel, after reaching a peak of nearly $28/barrel in early September. The rising price of WTI crude is having a negative impact on refiners’ margins, but no impact at all on pump prices. Pump prices keep falling because Brent crude prices are falling.

Like all good things, it won’t last forever. As WTI and Brent prices converge, the drop in pump prices will stop. And even if WTI prices should surpass Brent pricing again, the oil market will figure out a way to arbitrage the new spread to maximize profits. Enjoy the low prices while they last. Until then, maybe there is more cash for gifts this holiday season.

Paul Ausick

Competition plays a critical role in car rental agencies as well. We’ve gathered some data on Hertz Global Holdings Inc. (NYSE: HTZ) and Budget Group Inc. (NYSE: CAR), who were battling over Dollar Thrifty until earlier this month. We’ve also included Zipcar Inc. (NASDAQ: ZIP) in our review because there is evidence that its short-term rental model is about to get competition from both the big rental companies and the new car makers themselves.

Finally, we’ve looked at parts suppliers O’Reilly Automotive, Inc. (NASDAQ: ORLY), AutoZone, Inc. (NYSE: AZO), and Pep Boys – Manny, Joe, and Jack (NYSE: PBY). As car owners hold onto their cars longer, parts suppliers stand to profit.

All data from Yahoo! Finance and current stock prices were gather just before noon today.

General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) has a median target price of $42.00 from 17 brokers. Shortly before noon today, shares are trading today at $22.78, for an implied gain of $19.22, or 84%. GM’s forward P/E is 5.24 and the company does not pay a dividend. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $19.05-$39.48, and at today’s price that’s about 20% above its 52-week low and 42% below the 52-week high.

Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F) has a median target price of $16.00 from 15 brokers. Shares are trading today at $11.61, for an implied gain of $4.39, or 38%. Ford’s forward P/E is 6.59 and the company does not pay a dividend. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $9.05-$18.97, and at today’s price that’s about 28% above its 52-week low and 39% below the 52-week high.

Hertz Global Holdings Inc. (NYSE: HTZ) has a median target price of $21.00 from 5 brokers. Shares are trading today at $10.37, for an implied gain of $10.63 or 133%. Hertz’s forward P/E is 6.43 and the company does not pay a dividend. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $7.80-$17.64, and at today’s price that’s about 33% above its 52-week low and 41% below the 52-week high.

Avis Budget Group Inc. (NYSE: CAR) has a median target price of $27 from 5 brokers. Shares are trading today at $11.61, for an implied gain of $15.39, or 133%. Avis’s forward P/E is 8.95 and the company does not pay a dividend. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $8.45-$19.49, and at today’s price that’s about 37% above its 52-week low and 40% below the 52-week high.

Zipcar, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZIP) has a median target price of $31.25 from 4 brokers. Shares are trading today at $17.38, for an implied gain of $13.87, or 80%. Hertz’s forward P/E is an astronomical 273 as the company has yet to show a profit since its IPO in April. The company does not pay a dividend. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $16.50-$31.50, and at today’s price that’s about 5% above its 52-week low and 45% below the 52-week high.

AutoNation, Inc. (NYSE: AN) has a median target price of $32 from 8 brokers. Shares are trading today at $37.06, about 5% above its consensus target price. AutoNation’s forward P/E is 17.55 and the company does not pay a dividend. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $22.28-$41.55, and at today’s price that’s about 66% above its 52-week low and 10% below the 52-week high.

CarMax Inc. (NYSE: KMX) has a median target price of $33 from 13 brokers. Shares are trading today at $27.76, for an implied gain of $5.24, or 19%. CarMax’s forward P/E is 14.06 and the company does not pay a dividend. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $22.77-$37.02, and at today’s price that’s about 22% above its 52-week low and 25% below the 52-week high.

America’s Car-Mart, Inc. (NASDAQ: CRMT) has a median target price of $37 from 5 brokers. Shares are trading today at $29.89, for an implied gain of $7.11, or 24%. Car-Mart’s forward P/E is 8.86 and the company does not pay a dividend. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $22.77-$37.50, and at today’s price that’s about 31% above its 52-week low and 20% below the 52-week high.

O’Reilly Automotive, Inc. (NASDAQ: ORLY) has a median target price of $68 from 19 brokers. Shares are trading today at $70.16, about 2% above its consensus target price. O’Reilly’s forward P/E is 17.12 and the company does not pay a dividend. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $52.97-$72.00, and at today’s price that’s about 32% above its 52-week low and 3% below the 52-week high.

AutoZone, Inc. (NYSE: AZO) has a median target price of $350 from 17 brokers. Shares are trading today at $326.17, for an implied gain of $23.83, or 7.3%. AutoZone’s forward P/E is 12.59 and the company does not pay a dividend. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $229.84-$337.23, and at today’s price that’s about 42% above its 52-week low and 3% below the 52-week high.

Pep Boys – Manny, Joe, and Jack (NYSE: PBY) has a median target price of $16 from 5 brokers. Shares are trading today at $10.95, for an implied gain of $5.05, or 46%. The Pep Boys’s forward P/E is 9.43 and the company pays a dividend yield of 1.1%. The stock’s 52-week trading range is $7.86-$15.96, and at today’s price that’s about 39% above its 52-week low and 31% below the 52-week high.

As you can see, there are some of the auto-related stocks that are close to or are now fully valued.  Still, there remains massive upside if the consensus analyst targets can be met.  Some upside targets are still so high that you have to wonder if they have been updated to reflect the new reality or if they are even really attainable.

Paul Ausick

The Office for the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program said in a recent report that the bailout of the car industry put a lot of people out of work. That does not just include the people the auto firms laid off from their own payrolls. GM and Chrysler, both of which got government funding to come out of Chapter 11, were criticized early in the process for not closing enough dealerships to help the stanch the flow of red ink. GM decided to close 1,454 dealers and Chrysler 789 in response to the criticism from government officials. The Inspector General pointed out the car companies did not consider whether there was any substantial savings to be had from closing dealers and did not take into account how many people the move would put out of work.

The downsizing of the car industry  in 2008 and 2009 cost 400,000 jobs at the car companies according to the report. The dealer closings increased that figure by tens of thousands as 24/7 Wall St. wrote last June.

It is easy to say that the restructuring of GM and Chrysler happened so fast the dealer closings were collateral damage.  But since the federal government may never get back the entire amount it put into the two car companies, the closures made the process costlier to the federal government and local economies. Nearly all the people who lost jobs at dealerships will receive unemployment and tax revenue for the cities and town were the dealers were located will shrink.

One of the problems of the car industry restructuring is that it was not run by car people. Washington assumed that the industry had caused its problems and that no one within the industry could solve them. That does not mean that people from outside the industry, selected by the government, could do any better.

The prevailing opinion about why the auto sector ran out of money and therefore time to get itself turned around is that GM and Chrysler were poorly run. That may be true, but only to some extent. The greatest recession in the industry,  which dropped US vehicles sales from over 16 million units in 2004 to 10 million units in 2009, played a more substantial role that any other factor. People dispatched by the federal government to “fix” the industry may not have taken that into account enough.

What car industry executives might have told the government, if they were not afraid for their own jobs, is that the size of their dealer networks have very little to do with their overall costs. Most of a dealer’s expenses are borne by the dealer and not the manufacturer that supplies it cars. Dealership closings had only a marginal effect on the costs at GM and Ford.

Collateral damage is collateral damage until it undermines something core to the process of saving an industry. Unnecessarily putting tens of thousand of people out of work falls into a category of core damage but no one seemed to understand or care about that.

Douglas A. McIntyre