They’re just better cars, made to more exacting standards with higher quality materials and better engineering and features.
And Toyota consistently ranks higher.
https://www.drive.com.au/news/most-reliable-and-least-reliab...
Unless you think the word quality is just fully synonymous with reliability (in which case a paper airplane beats an F-18) then my point stands.
Quality is famously subjective, that's why you'll never see it ranked in a way that everyone can agree on the way you can with reliability which is actually measurable.
But reliability is one of the markers that most people would use to judge quality. And we generally expect aircraft to go where we want them to without catastrophic failure, so I would think that an F18 is more reliable than a paper plane.
Assuming my paper airplane never goes into the shop it’s going to outrank the F-18.
Ain’t a better plane though.
Say I wanted a low-cost, lightweight, hand-propelled aircraft capable of flying short distances indoors that I could fold up and put in my pocket afterwards? Which would be the "better" plane then?
In practice, it just meant Chevy often cheaped out on the water pump and you got water pump failures after the warranty expired.
Corolla designers are highly constrained by cost.
Fun way to think about it (borrowed from James May): A Toyota Corolla is higher quality than a Rolls Royce. Because Toyota makes 10,000,000 vehicles per year. Rolls makes only 6,000. Meaning Toyota is better at making cars just by virtue of having 4 orders of magnitude more practice.