Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Toyota Tundra Problems

1151618202140

Comments

  • Im glad to hear that your truck is running virtually problem free. I've still decided on getting a Tundra and hope to have the same experience as you have, as well as Bama, Cowboy and a few others who are pretty satisfied with truck. Am I worried about whether its gonna pull more than Fords top of line monster ... not in the least. Not too concerned about some of the other numbers either.

    The truck is a little different than the rest and thats all I expect out of it. It seems to be a great truck for the uses that most of us use them for. If mine will stay reliable, quiet, and low maintenance, I'll be more than happy. If you've been using parking brake pretty regularly and no brake problems then I'll keep that in mind.

    The choice is pretty simple actually. If not the Tundra then what ??? Certainly not gonna get lost in those American trucks, their posts speak for themselves. My roomate has a Silverado and until recently I hadn't had the opportunity to experience why they're termed "Shakerados" . I've never been more nervous in a truck than when im in the rado and the brakes are applied, way too scary. Must say, I like the truck and plenty of room up front, but no thanks, think Toyota will be just fine.
  • eric2001eric2001 Posts: 482
    FYI: If you have the self-adjusting brakes (spring loaded lever on star adjuster) the proper way to adjust them is to get going about 10 mph in reverse, then slam on the brakes. I know it seems harsh, but that is how they were designed. Setting the parking brake does not adjust the brakes at all.

    On the other hand, it is a good idea to use your parking brake often, as it keeps the cables lubed, and it is there when you need it. Nothing worse than a 'frozen' brake cable and a locked up set of brakes.
  • Hi all,

    I'm a first time poster to this board. Have read both the good and bad stuff on the Tundra. Nothing too scary. I'm gonna possibly buy one tomorrow or this coming monday depending on if the deal is right. But I'm in no hurry. Has anyone gotten one for around invoice, aside from the newpaper ad cars? The best quote I've gotten over the phone is $400 over invoice. The guy somewhat indicated that it was negotiable.

    I'm pretty much sold on the Tundra for my next truck. My current workhorse is a Nissan hardbody and while it has served me well and never let me down, I'd like a bit more truck.

    For awhile now, I considered the Chevy Silverado, Ford F150, and the Tundra. All of them at one time or another became a leading contender in my mind. All of them, in my opinion have strengths. And they all have weaknesses. But for me, the Tundra has more pluses that minuses.

    Anyhoo, I hope I don't have to raise my blood pressure too high haggling for a good enough deal at the car store. I always hate spending the 5-7 hours it take to buy a vehicle. I zaps away the whole day.
  • ndahi12ndahi12 Posts: 235
    I would not pay more than 1% over invoice. A lot of people are getting their trucks at invoice. I have heard that toyota is running a 2.9% special financing but I do not know the details. I got my truck for for 1% over invoice and then I got a $100 gift certificate to Home Depot. I got 4.9% financing for 60 months back when they were running the 0%.

    I know the issues of the Tundra and I will list them:

    Cramped rear space
    Bed needs to be an 1-2 inch deeper
    Soft stock shocks, at least for me
    Cold start up clatter
    Warpped rotors on the 2000 and some 2001
    Thin paint
    No gas door latch inside the truck. That one really pisses me off.
    Occasional tranny thunk when you come to an abrupt stop. Lubing the drive shaft that exits the tranny seems to solve the problem.

    I honestly cannot think of anything else. Gas mileage will average 15 mpg. I tow with my truck and I drive 75-80 on the frwy and still get 15 mpg. I do not think that is bad considering my driving style.

    So far I am very satisfied with the truck.
  • obyoneobyone Posts: 8,065
    Well I can think of one. Is the pistons in the Tundra cast or forged?
  • Here's the question I asked initially:

    "So as far as you're concerned, it's perfectly acceptable to spend about 30 grand on a new 1/2 ton pickup that reqires the parking brake to be set each time you park the truck or suffer brake damage??"


    It's a simple yes or no question. Does Toyota put that parking brake info in their owner's literature, or do you have to figure that out on your own?


    And since YOU bought up relative braking performance versus GM trucks, here's the Edmunds data:

    http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/43902/page015.html

    As you can see, the Tundra stopped in a whopping six feet shorter span. That's the distance of an average man's height compared against the total distance of about half of a football field. Big deal. The Silverado weighs a little more, so that's to be expected. I'll take that and keep my brakes, which won't turn into scrap metal if I forget to set the parking brake!!

  • i hope you never hit a pothole or rough area on the road when you are braking because if you do more than likely you will be in for a thrill
  • arkie6arkie6 Posts: 198
    "FYI: If you have the self-adjusting brakes (spring loaded lever on star adjuster) the proper way to adjust them is to get going about 10 mph in reverse, then slam on the brakes. I know it seems harsh, but that is how they were designed. Setting the parking brake does not adjust the brakes at all."

    The rear brakes don't work that way on a Tundra. The Tundra does use rear drum brakes with a toothed wheel adjuster to maintain the shoes in close proximity to the drum; however, backing up does nothing to rotate the toothed wheel on the adjuster like on older Chevies. On the Tundra, appling the parking brake rotates the toothed wheel on the adjuster if needed. It looks similar to the Chevy brakes, but works a little bit differently.

    And contrary to a previous post, it is not necessary to use your parking brake every time you park. Using it once a month or so is likely enough to keep the rear shoes properly adjusted since the rear brakes don't wear nearly as fast as the front brakes.

    I believe most of the problems with the warping rotors and drums on the Tundra are due to the brake pad materials used. Due to government regulations surrounding health concerns with asbestoes, asbestoes has been removed from brake pads and linings, and brake manufacturers just haven't come up with a suitable replacement material that is on par with asbestoes as far as performance and cost are concerned. If you take a look through Edmunds townhall, you will see many complaints on all different makes of vehicles regarding warped brake rotors. Another contributer to the potential for front brake rotor warping on the Tundra is its use of 4 piston front calipers (the industry standard is 2 piston calipers on the front except for high end sports cars). These calipers can generate a tremendous amount of pressure and along with that comes heat (these 4 piston front calipers are also likely the reason the Tundra stops in a shorter distance than most if not all other pickups). Another thing to consider is the rear brake proportioning valve. If it is not properly set and you have too much front brake bias then this would be putting more stress and strain on the front brakes. The factory service manual has a detailed procedure for checking the brake bias, but I doubt most dealers would go to this trouble. It is just a whole lot easier to change pads and rotors and get you out of the shop hopefully until after your warranty expires. Another thing is that if you artificially raise or lower the rear of the truck, you will affect brake bias because the Tundra uses a load sensing proportioning valve. It measures the distance from the rear axle to the frame and increases rear brake bias as the distance between the two decreases (as would be indicated with increased load in the bed or on the bumper). If you raise the back of the truck with a lift (lift blocks, stiffer springs, helper springs, etc.) and do not adjust the proportioning valve linkage accordingly, you will reduce rear brake bias and shift more braking pressure to the front wheels even though the load on the truck has not changed.

    So far, knock on wood, I have 27,500 miles on my 2000 Tundra 4x4 and have no indications of front brake rotor warping (and I still have all of the original brake components installed).

    Alan
  • f1julesf1jules Posts: 288
    I have 30,000 miles on my Tundra and it has been to the dealership exactly once for the brake vibration problem (around 10,000 miles). The problem was more an annoyance than anything though. In no way did the truck ever feel unsafe. Toyota finished the repairs in a couple hours and I haven't had the problem since.

    I don't use the parking brake everytime I park. I use it when I park on a hill or in my driveway which is sloped (I only park there to wash the truck and occassionally when I'm not parked in my garage).

    "So as far as you're concerned, it's perfectly acceptable to spend about 30 grand on a new 1/2 ton pickup that reqires the parking brake to be set each time you park the truck or suffer brake damage??"

    So hill, to answer your question, no, it's not okay but I don't know of any Tundra owners who a) paid $30 grand for their truck and/or b) are required to set the parking brake each time they park or suffer brake damage. Sorry but the facts do not support your statement.

    I paid a little over $23k for my 2000 Tundra SR-5. I didn't get leather or 4x4. I have most of the other options though. MSRP was roughly $26,400.

    I would never pay MSRP for a vehicle.
  • f1julesf1jules Posts: 288
    Man, I just read through 20 or so posts on the silverado problems thread and I actually feel sorry for some of those people. What a sorry-assed truck that silverado is.

    Reminds me of a guy I used to work with. He has a fullsize Chevy conversion van and his transmission went out at 40,000 miles. Cost him about $2,000 to have it rebuilt. What a rip off.

    How do you defend a company that manufactures junk like that? Why do people defend them? I guess if you only plan on keeping the thing for 2 years or you might be okay. Maybe that's how these people rationalize their purchase.
  • ndahi12ndahi12 Posts: 235
    I overstated the need to use the parking brake. *I* use it EVERY time I park. Growing up in a monutainous country taught me that. It is safe to use it every time. It puts less stress on your tranny to use the parking brake every time. And it resets your brake bias when you use it on the Tundra.

    I use mine everytime I park, where ever I park.

    Just use the damned thing. Why do you think it was put in the truck in the first place? If it was not an integral part of any vehicle, it would have been made an option!!!!!
  • ndahi12ndahi12 Posts: 235
    Here are some facts to ponder:

    Fact 1: The Tundra stops in a shorter distance than the Chevy in whatever magazine that did the test.

    Fact 2: The Tundra has been number one in intial quality with JD Power and recommended by CR for two years in a row and the Rado has not.

    Fact 3: There are more TSBs and recalls year to year for the Rado than the Tundra, a lot more.

    Fact 4: In its displacement class the Tundra out accelerates and out handles the Rado in any of the standard tests that mags run.

    Fact 5: The Tundra has better resale value than the rado.

    Fact 6: The Rado has more cabinet room, bed space, and tows more than the Tundra.

    Fact 7: The Tundra is the only 1/2 ton truck that is SOLELY built in the US
  • bamatundrabamatundra Posts: 1,583
    Last I checked some Shakerados are built in Canada. All Ava-lose-my-lunches are built in Mexico. If you ask most Canadians or Mexicans they will say that they do not consider their country part of the US (yet).
  • f1julesf1jules Posts: 288
    I don't use the parking brake when I'm parked on a level surface-like my garage for example. When I first bought the truck I guess I used to use it more because for the past 10 years I owned a stick shift car and I always used the parking brake. I find myself using it on the truck when I am out but when I pull in the garage I don't set it. It's a habit that I'm falling out of I guess.

    You're right though, you should use it because that's what its there for.
  • I was here to talk about Tundras, but since you insist on talking about GMs, I'll respond to your "facts to ponder":

    1. The Tundra weighs less. It should stop in a shorter distance.
    2. That's true. I never disputed it.
    3. There are a heck of alot more of "my" truck manufactured and sold yearly with a higher variety of options/eqipment. Only stands to reason there are more TSBs issued! Toyota only started offering something other than a open rear-diff this year.
    4. Again; It's a smaller and lighter truck and should handle and accelerate good. On the other hand-every article I've read pans the Tundra's handling while it's loaded due to it's lighter(?) suspension. See the Truck Trend article of Tundra vs. Silverado from last summer.
    5. Maybe short term. Long-term remains to be seen.
    6. Yes, but most folks who tow with their Tundra are happy with it's performance.
    7. Who cares? My goal was to buy the best performing 1/2 ton in it's class and that's why I got a GM 1500. It out-hauls/tows, out-accelerates loaded and empty and has more cab and bed space than any other 1/2 ton on the market at the time. While I do prefer American brand vehicles, I would buy another brand if it's what I really wanted.
  • "i hope you never hit a pothole or rough area on the road when you are braking because if you do more than likely you will be in for a thrill'

    Actually, I hit potholes regularly-it's hard not to where I live and I assume the thrill you're hinting at is the anti-lock brakes kicking in? LOL! That "twanging" noise was unnerving at first but the brakes on my Silverado never fail me, even after two seasons of driving on icy roads. The truck always tracks straight as an arrow if I stomp the brakes in a low traction situation. Honestly, while the Tundra has the shortest stopping distance, the brakes on these GM 1500s are excellent and they work great under load or empty.

    Strangely enough, after I replaced the stock Firestones with a new set of BFGs ATs, I hardly ever have the antilock system kick in. Maybe the stock tires are not highly compatable with the ABS??
  • I don't know if you've already checked or not, but I know a few people who went to carsdirect.com and got their trucks for exactly invoice. They also said that cars directs invoice was lower than the invoices that dealers were using. I could do without the 10 hour charade of insulting each other at the sales desk otherwise known as buying a car, good luck.
  • ndahi12ndahi12 Posts: 235
    1. I do NOT care why the Tundra stops in a shorter distance, the FACT that it does is enough for me. That FACT you cannot and will not be able to dispute.

    2. I love that excuse. There are more Rados on the road, therefore you should expect more recalls and TSBs. What a cope out!!! Is that all you can muster. Maybe there also should be more recalls TSBs on the Camry since there are more of them out there than the Malibu??? What kind of logic is that??? The sad thing is that the 1999 Rado was a redesign while the Tundra was totally new and the Tundra still had less TSBs/recalls than the Rado. Very sad indeed.

    3. I already admitted that the stock shocks suck. Put HD Bilestins on and the Tundra will run circles around the Rado loaded or unloaded.

    4. Short term, long term, mid term and between terms, The Tundra has better resale value than the Rado. End of story. Stop making excuses. Look up Auto Trader and find how the tundra holds its value better than the Rado.

    5. I agree, I am very happy with the way my tundra tows. I tow 4000 lbs and I drive 75-80 mph when I tow. I have the AC on and I am in OD on the flats. I also use cruise control.

    6. There are many yahoos out there who think that by buying a Rado they are being patriotic. What a crock?
  • Well i'm glad to hear that theres still a good amount of guys out there not experiencing huge brake problems with truck. Eases my mind a little I suppose. I think using the parking brake couple times a month might just be a decent idea.

    I think Alan brings up some good points, and helps realize that many trucks are going thru similar brake problems. Not to mention that we're not exactly talking about stopping Yugos or Tercels here. I think in time we'll find better materials to construct brake components from, and make the systems more efficient in general. Sure come a long ways from the old days though.
  • ndahi12ndahi12 Posts: 235
    While I do not have data to back it up, I would say that those that are experiencing brake problems on their 2000 Tundra are a very small minority.
  • bamatundrabamatundra Posts: 1,583
    I forgot to put my emergency brake on today. Oh, no! - I forgot to put it on this month!

    Come to think of it - I can count on one hand the number of times I have used my emergency brake in the past two years.

    My brakes still amaze me. I realize that I am driving a 4500lb vehicle and I still can't believe how well the brakes work.

    I have not had my Tundra in the shop once. I will have to eventually get my seat belt retractor looked at - it is getting slow at retracting my belt.

    I have the ABS option. Tundras have a superior 4channel ABS. Chev cheaped out with two channels on their ABS and they must have got their disks off of a Chevette.

    I have heard that with ABS equipped Tundras there is no proportioning valve.
  • Glad to hear the brakes are still ok EVEN without using parking brake much. One would hope the brakes as well as rest of truck would be fine without having to perform daily rituals on it. Just make sure you dont get too froggy with it and end up out there workin a forein one in dem dere fields.
  • When you say so readily that "There are many yahoos out there who think that by buying a Rado they are being patriotic. What a crock?"

    Remember this; There are just as many blubbering morons out there (and a few on this forum) who stupidly label all domestic trucks as junk. If you think buying a domestically manufactured Toyota or any other brand truck gives you the upper hand in patriotism (and it sounds like you do since you bragged about it up in post 535) you need to go learn what the word "patriotism" means. Why'd you even bring this issue up Ndahi?? And remember if you resond to this, you made it an issue, not me.

    And slow down. It's not real safe to go 80mph with a 4000 lb trailer on any 1/2 ton pickup even if yours does stop a whole six feet shorter and is worth an extra $700 on the used car lot. LOL!!
  • f1julesf1jules Posts: 288
    "label all domestic trucks as junk"

    I for one did not label all domestic trucks as junk, just the GM brands. It's just a plain and simple fact I'm stating.

    2000 Tundra trade-in value: $14,842 retail: $18,015

    2000 rado trade-in: $13,642 retail: $16,312

    This is for similarly equiped vehicles. So, that's a $1,200 difference trade-in and a $1,700 difference on retail value. The difference will increase with age also.
  • hutch7hutch7 Posts: 88
    You forgot to add Ford to your "junkbox", my '97
    F-150 needed a new engine at 38,000! Not to mention new doors, new steering box, new roof rails new...you name it! My 15% smaller Tundra has been flawless and I've never looked back...except maybe to see the 'rado in my mirror!
  • xyz71xyz71 Posts: 179
    So using your example the Chevy has held 83.6% of MSRP - Tundra 82.3%. I think this gives the resale advantage to Chevy not Toyota.
  • f1julesf1jules Posts: 288
    I don't know where you get your numbers from. I just looked up the MSRP on a similarly equipped Tundra and rado. Tundra: $25,050 rado: $25,731. That works out to 72% of MSRP for the Tundra and 63% for the chev.

    Factor in all the trips to the dealership and the out of warranty repairs if you keep the rado for more than 2 years and there is no contest.

    I think I see what you were getting at though. The retail figure I quoted above is not the original MSRP. This is the price a dealership would try to sell the used vehicle for. It has nothing to do with MSRP. When you trade a vehicle in you negotiate a fair price based on condition of the vehicle and you try to get as close to the retail price as you can. As you can see, there isn't as much room to go up on the chev as there is on the Tundra.
  • When you say "I for one did not label all domestic trucks as junk, just the GM brands. It's just a plain and simple fact I'm stating."

    Do you really believe that? You've always been one of the more well-spoken and rational Tundra guys around here and I'm suprised to hear that from you.

    A guy I worked with had a nightmare quality experience with a 5-speed Tacoma a few years ago. Toyota could'nt fix it and he traded it for another brand, but I don't think that means all Tacomas are junk.

    Does the Tundra's warping brakes, cold-start clatter and thin sheet metal and cheap paint classify it as "junk"? Ndahi already said his could not haul well without new shocks, and the last Motor Trend article rated the Tundra's V8 engine the poorest for hauling/towing in the four-member 1/2 ton class comparison in that issue. How about this poor guy:jimedwards Feb 15, 2002 4:14pm. Edmunds and Truck Trend's tests both show GM's 5.3L 1500s outaccelerate the Tundra empty and loaded!

    Dang f1...you sure do have to overlook alot of stuff with the Tundra to call any other truck junk and keep a straight face!!

    I don't think Tundras are "junk" at all. They have strong and weak points just like any other truck. The reason I get a kick out of posting this stuff is that *SOME* of you guys think the Tundra is 100% bulletproof compared to other makes.

    And hey...with that trade in value data: Maybe you're right, I don't know. Personally, I don't see how anyone is going to prove it one way or another and here's why. There are so many factors involved it's virtually impossible to consider them all. Vehicle condition, the owner's negotiating skills, options, geographical location (eg..4wds are worth more in certain areas), what the used truck is being traded in on, even color! I'm guessing you can support the argument either way depending where you source the numbers from.

    This should be good F1. You're one of the few guys on here who will agrue points intelligently without name-calling and personal slurs, so I'm always pleased when you weigh in. Let's hear it...
  • xyz71xyz71 Posts: 179
    I misread your post -
  • ak4x4ak4x4 Posts: 126
    And everyone thinks my "Knockarado" is a bad truck. Man this lady was going anbot 30MPH and hit the brakes to late. T-Boned a Honda Civic. Tundra faired up good for the type of collision. But I guess this can happen no matter what you drive. BTW Up here I am seeing alot of Tundra owners wanting to put plows on. They can't do it on the Tundra. They seem to get peed off and go buy a ford or 2500. If Toyota wants to stay in the game of full-size P-ups then a plow prep package is a must. Also, what is the difference in size between the T-100 and the Tundra?? Seems like if they put the V8I in the T-100 it would have made a great truck!
This discussion has been closed.