Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Half-ton Pickups - The full field

24567

Comments

  • toyota4lifetoyota4life Member Posts: 53
    Give it up Hank Hill (Troll)!The Tundra is here to stay ,i will gladly take the Tundra over getting burn in every ford there is, Or any silverado that gets recalled 4 times in one year, Or dooooge ram that gets recalls 8 times in one year . :sick: :lemon:
  • titanium29titanium29 Member Posts: 38
    Ok, since we are all venting strong opinions here, I'll join the fray. I have owned an 02 Tundra, and still own an 02 Sequoia (basically the same thing in a four door). They are quality built, 1/2 trucks. Hard to beat on a quality yardstick.

    BUT, I traded in my 02 Tundra for the last of the pre-cat-back Diesel RAMS with the Cummins diesel for two compelling reasons: I need a ONE ton, with a dependable diesel to do some towing of an average 40 foot fifth wheel.

    You CAN'T do that with a Tundra, even the new one. Not safely, anyway. And not without an 8 mpg reality.

    In my opinion, Toyota blows it again, in that they contemplated putting a diesel in, and didn't. And to my knowledge they still aren't thinking beyond a beefy 1/2 ton.

    When and if they make a one ton, serious torque and HP diesel, with dually back tires on the blacktop truck, I'm all there. In the meantime, you can choose from Chevy, Ford, and Dodge to do the job based on your personal preferences. For me, I chose Dodge because of the Cummins motor. But Toyota wasn't even in the running because of the relatively limited towing capability, no matter how good a truck they build. It just ain't big enough yet! I hope they read this, and get down to it. Then maybe some competition would begin!
  • toyota4lifetoyota4life Member Posts: 53
    I see what you are saying Titanium,I have a friend who has one of the older rams with the cummins diesel,It is far from perfect but he said most people buys the truck because of the cummins motor ,He said he can only manage 10 1/2 mpg ,But he is in construction ,He has a cap with aluminum brakes,Two extention ladders,Generator,Compressor you name it ,And if you have not heard yet ,Toyota will unviel a new Tundra diesel dually soon ,(source autoblog)So hold on to your hat, :P
  • toyota4lifetoyota4life Member Posts: 53
    The 2007 SEMA Show in Las Vegas is not for another three and a half months, but Toyota is getting its ducks in a row preparing for what promises to be a big week in Sin City for the Japanese automaker. It's unveiling not one, not two, but three vehicles at SEMA, including the all-new 2009 Corolla. The current Corolla has been around the block a few more times than Toyota had planned, but still remains a popular vehicle for the company. The new model will include the familiar sedan body type, but also mark the return of a coupe/hatchback. We'll no doubt see a TRD version customized to the nines at SEMA, as well. If the fates are on our side, perhaps they'll show something rear-wheel drive (fingers crossed).

    Also present at SEMA will reportedly be a heavy duty diesel dually Tundra pickup designed to be a monster tow machine. It's only a concept and yet to be named, but the HD Tundra will be there to gauge crowd reaction to a dedicated heavy hauler from Toyota. The diesel will likely come from Hino, Toyota's commercial truck division, but Popular Mechancs reports that most of its engines are just too big for the Tundra's bay. The size issue could force Toyota to debut a new, smaller 4.5L diesel V8 that it's been working on. We'll have to wait and see what powers the Tundra concept, but we'd bet our last slot token that this particular Toyota will most certainly not be a hybrid.

    Finally, Toyota plans to introduce an FJ Cruiser Convertible concept at SEMA. Reportedly sporting a removable hardtop, sources say that the concept is likely a production prototype in disguise since going to all that trouble engineering a removable hardtop for one vehicle would be silly. To get an idea of what the FJ Cruiser Convertible will look like, take a peek at the aftermarket version.

    So there you have it – Toyota's 2008 SEMA lineup. Now that the information's out there, hopefully Toyota will start releasing official pics soon, as well.

    [Source: Popular Mechanics]
  • 12ozcurls12ozcurls Member Posts: 65
    Well the parts are built by subcontractors OWNED by Toyota. Toyota is also having quality problems in its very own backyard..so to imply that the US built parts are the reason things aren't working is retarded.

    http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/07/toyota_recalls_reax.html
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    I need a ONE ton, with a dependable diesel to do some towing of an average 40 foot fifth wheel.

    You CAN'T do that with a Tundra, even the new one. Not safely, anyway.


    I'm sure some Tundra loyalist will disagree. For example,

    "#1550 of 1586 SUBJECTIVE FIRST 500 MILES by subjective Aug 20, 2007 (10:53 am)
    Bookmark | Reply
    The 07 Tundra 5.7 surely held up to the three quarter ton diesels as tested in the September issue of Consumer Reports. This test was an eye opener to me and I think it would be to most people that read it. I can tell you for a fact that my new Tundra would blow away my Hemi that I just sold. Those of you with doubts might like to get a copy and read the tests. I actually said closer to a three quarter ton than a half ton. I actually cant imagine how much closer you could get unless a new better generation of three quarter tons come out. My truck weights more than yours alone simply put does not cut it anymore!


    AND

    #1552 of 1586 Re: SUBJECTIVE FIRST 500 MILES [subjective] by bugchucker Aug 21, 2007 (8:40 am)
    Bookmark | Reply
    Replying to: subjective (Aug 20, 2007 10:53 am)
    Word is getting out to 3/4 and 1 ton owners. They won't even come up to the line against my Tundra anymore.


    So you see according to them you don't need no Ram diesel 1 ton...the Tundra will do it all :P
  • titanium29titanium29 Member Posts: 38
    Like I say, I've owned both. Hook that 07 Tundra up to a 40 foot fifth wheel weighing 14,000 pounds loaded and haul it down the highway next to passing 18-wheelers. You'll be scared to death. Though, that might be a good thing....you'll want to get off the road anyway, so frequent gas station stops for the gasoline engine reality of 7-8 mpg at BEST will get addressed for ya!
    When Toyota does a diesel, one ton, dually, I'll be there. But they have tantalized us before with such speak (the new Tundra lineup was supposed to originally have a diesel option), and still haven't delivered. As I say, Toyota is a good product, but for real HD needs, it just comes up short. Not a critcism, just a reality.
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    I agree with the need for a one ton diesel truck. What concerns me is that some actually beleive what they read in Consumer Reports and somehow lose track of reality because Consumer Reports says so.
  • subjectivesubjective Member Posts: 62
    I agree that you do need a heavy duty turbo diesel for your 14K lb 5th wheeler and the Dodge is a good one. My 04 hemi was a good one with no problems, but I like my new Tundra better. I would never attempt to pull a trailer like yours with it. I like my new Tundra so much that sometimes I get carried away. If it holds up as well as my hemi, I will be very happy.
  • mule2mule2 Member Posts: 11
    To the man talking about hooking a tundra to a 40ft.trailer it would be crazy. I owned a dodge cummins it was a good truck.I got 14 mi per gal loaded. I own a new tundra now it will pull my 34 ft. jayco eagle 9700# easy.Thats all i need.12 miles per gal.The only thing i don't like about the diesel now is diesal is .30 cents a gal.higher. You will have more money left at the end of day with the tundra.I have a friend that wants to buy a new ford or dodge $45000.00 to $55000.00 to pull his camper to lake 6 times per year. Thats over kill.
  • toykickstoykicks Member Posts: 95
    look i found a non bias video lol

    couple of regular rednecks hookin up their trucks up to each other. (i mean redneck in a good way ;) )

    Whats interesting is that they're both locked in 4x4 You can see the dodge rams all four wheels grabbing :surprise: .

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHc9Jd78iQs
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    What's interesting is the bed shake on the Tundra.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zShwG9l1F0Q
  • toyota4lifetoyota4life Member Posts: 53
    What is interesting is the Tundra pulling all the domestics toys like raggdolls ,after watching the bed shake the video should be right there,if not just pounch in tundra vs silverado,or f150 or ram :P
  • dennisplusdennisplus Member Posts: 20
    :surprise: Woooooow!!! That thing Would not be a good offroad truck! I love my Dodge!
  • crimsono2crimsono2 Member Posts: 31
    What's interesting is the seemingly arbitrary and random entry speed number of 28mph for those road conditions.

    I suspect, but cannot prove, that it's a resonance frequency for the Tundra bed shake and less so for all the others.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance_frequency

    I bet all the trucks would exhibit similar behavior if you hit just the right speed for them...
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    While I agree on the resonance and why at 28 mph, the fact remains that the bed bounce is unacceptable. More I think about it there are current '07 Tundra owners complaining about the bed bounce at tundrasolutions. Wish I could post a link but that is against Edmunds policy to link to another forum especially one that features autos but I'm sure you can find them if you looked.
  • gotoyotagotoyota Member Posts: 280
    The "American" car makers are outsourcing components, and in some cases, assembly, to Mexico. Your logic is flawed. If Toyota, who is sourcing nearly 100% of the components for the Tundra from US suppliers and building them here with American workers, is only helping the Japanese economy, then who gets the dollars for all those parts they buy and for all the labor to build each Tundra? American companies and workers, that's who. Who gets the dollars for all the components that sum up an American truck? Some go to the US, some go to Mexican (and other countries) companies they source from. The final product sale may ultimately benefit Toy of Japan or, or in the case of the American counterparts, GM, Ford or Dodge, but that's only a slice of the pie. For your argument to hold up, you'd have to disregard all the components that go into each vehicle and the direct benefit to all the American suppliers who help build the various parts of each truck. Any more, no matter which brand of vehicle you purchase, you are helping the American economy. And conversely, buying exclusively American means you will consequently benefit many foreign suppliers. This IS a global economy. I'm very happy to see GM, Ford and Dodge upping their game in terms of the quality of their vehicles in recent years, but they've burned a lot of people in the past. It takes more than the "buy American" argument to persuade most people to choose a GM or Ford or Dodge over a Toyota or any other brand, for that matter. Establishing a track record of consistent quality and building a more desireable truck (or car) that looks great, drives well and does what buyers want is what will ultimately win buyers who might otherwise shop for a foreign brand. I have been burned badly on three American cars, and at one point would never consider buying another. Time heals wounds however, and I would consider another at some point, when I feel like they have proven that they build a vehicle that equals offerings from Toyota, for example. Until then, I'll buy Toyota's because every one I've owned has held up remarkably well, and has been nearly bullet proof. All cars are just machines, subject to the laws of entropy, but Toyota has the best reputation in the industry for consistenly high quality.
  • gotoyotagotoyota Member Posts: 280
    I should add that if I needed to pull something, I'd have to go with a diesel which precludes the Tundra from even being in the running - just so I don't appear to be completely biased :shades:
  • toykickstoykicks Member Posts: 95
    And all marketing done by ford ;)

    You'll be surprised how many trolls are around Tundrasolutions.com People have gotten caught lying about their issues.. and continue to post at TS.com. Some are so good at lying its amazing how far theyve gone before getting busted... That site is a troll space and will continue to be one since There are thousands of people who hate toyota.. I dont blame them thousands are jobless because of the low car sales for the big 3 and toyota is a target :P. GM, Ford and Diamler are relying on trucks sales to keep them in business theyre going to do an all out war against Toyota & nissan. GM already said they're going to attack online and Television advertising to pick up sales. And yep you guessed it Forums are a huge target.
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    With the Cummins Diesel, a 6.1 Hemi at 400+HP, and updated safety features, I'm sure the next Ram will be quite competitive, and Tundra will get a update for 2010.

    DrFill
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    at least we got a once dead topic revived... :P
  • 12ozcurls12ozcurls Member Posts: 65
    what i want to know is, where were all these tundra lovers when the last tundra was fallin apart? Talk about bandwagon fans.....
  • gotoyotagotoyota Member Posts: 280
    What I want to know is where are all the critics when a Ford, GM or Dodge truck falls apart? Certainly no one here is going to try to say THAT never happens, right? We all know better. And if the previous Tundra was such a piece of garbage, how did it manage to win so many accolades for most trouble free and lowest cost of ownership? When used within the scope of its design which was a medium-large light duty truck, not a heavy duty, it performed well, albeit with a somewhat undersized engine. The new one is not a heavy duty either so it's not reasonable to compare it with the heavy duty offerings from GM, Ford and Dodge. Let's compare apples to apples. If and when Toyota makes a one-ton Tundra it would be reasonable to compare it with heavy duty trucks. Right now it's only reasonable to compare with other half tons. For someone who simply needs a half ton truck with lots of balls, the Tundra is a good choice. For those of us who have owned American cars that didn't hold up after 40K miles or so, the Tundra is a clear winner.
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    "For those of us who have owned American cars that didn't hold up after 40K miles or so"

    Now that makes sense as I used to trade my American cars before the OEM tires wore out.

    "The new one is not a heavy duty either so it's not reasonable to compare it with the heavy duty offerings from GM, Ford and Dodge."

    You are correct and it is usually the Tundra owners who bring up how "heavy duty" it is not the big 3 owners. I can understand their enthusiasm with their new truck and also understand how dangerous it is to overestimate the capabilities of a truck when hauling and towing are concerned.
  • gotoyotagotoyota Member Posts: 280
    Your message cracked me up. Wish I had known that before - if I just traded in instead of replacing the tires it would have save me a lot of headaches - and cash!

    Yeah, you can't blame them for getting excited about their new trucks. I am a Toyota fan (obviously) but if I needed to haul a big trailor or boat (I don't) I would buy a diesel and pray that the rest of the truck holds up as long as the engine. I used to work for one of the leaders in performance electronics for the "Big Three" diesels, and I have driven them all a fair amount. I am a huge fan of the Cummins and the Duramax, but even the engineers I worked with realized that those trucks, as good as their engines were, suffered in terms of quality. A lot of the guys that drove them frequently complained about the problems they had - not just with the modified parts, but with things like interior pieces that fell apart, electrical problems, bed jitters, you name it. Still, there's nothing like the rush of 900 lb-ft of torque under foot. Yee haw! ;) But then nothing can be more frustrating than something breaking on a truck you paid $50K+ for.
  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    obyone

    Thanks for the links to the videos. I don't care if it was a Ford ad, the video doesn't lie. It is what it is. The video of the frames was really interesting. The Tundra frame is flimsy by comparison, the F150 frame is clearly superior in every respect. I'd be interested in a "frame-off" between the F150 and the new Silverado, since that is what I currently own. The Silverado is also fully boxed. Before I bought I slid under the Silverado and Tundra (which I always do when I contemplate a car puchase. How many other people do that I wonder???). The Silverado undercarriage blew me away compared to the Tundra.

    Before you start the flames, let me once again say that I've owned 2 Toyotas, 1 of which was really good (1985) and one of which was mediocre at best (1992). But at least they both had relatively beefy fully boxed frames considering they were "mini-trucks". The riveted c-channel Tundra frame is a huge step backward. Why would Toyota do that? To save on cost maybe? I dunno, but it's a mistake in terms of durability and a marketing blunder, if what you're trying to do is appeal to the American truck owner who needs a working machine that will last.

    Once again, a good marketing strategy by Ford. When you strip a vehicle down you really get to see what's underneath. The Tundra is wearin' a thong under them fancy duds, I'm tellin' ya.

    1offroader
  • 12ozcurls12ozcurls Member Posts: 65
    Well the critics are right here in this forum..duh. Thats my point. the new tundra owners are having a grand ol time these days, as they should, since their beloved company FINALLY built them a decent truck. All im saying is that you never hear a peep out the previous model tundra owners but now they're talkin all big and bad...I just find it funny. And funnier still how, i would guess, that 99% of these tundras will never see a spec of dirt. They'll just sit in the drive-way looking fugly as all toyota vehicles do, never being used for their intended purpose or using anywhere near all the power they make. But when you look at most work trucks they are always chevys fords and dodges, even though the trundra name has been out for several years now...and i guess im not one of those americans who owned an american car that didn't make it past 40k. both my parents still have their old chevy's(camaro) and fords(f150) and are well on their way to seeing almost half a milliion miles. My '91 Explorer had almost 140,000 on it before i got into a wreck. Not a lick of problems. Meanwhile almost 10 million toyotas have been recalled in the past few years both here and in japan for quality issues, sludge in the engine, or shaky suspensions...just food for thought.
  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    12oz

    I posted a few weeks back in the Silverado forum about a vacation I took into the Heartland (Montana, Utah, Wyo., Iowa, S.Dakota, etc.) . I made some observations about the trucks I saw doing actual work. I saw a few new Tundras, but they were all in the cities, nice and clean, hauling zip. I also saw quite a few new 2007 Silverados/GMCs, hauling hay, towing trailers loaded with farm equip. etc., splattered in mud and gawd knows what else. In other words, working. (There were also tons of Fords & Dodges, but I can't tell the 07s from earlier models). My conclusion was that a sale is a sale as far as Toyota is concerned, but if they want to crack the truck market they are going to need to get some of their trucks on ranches and farms where the real work is going on. So far it ain't happenin'.

    1offroader
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    Whether you read the link or not. :surprise:

    Moving on....

    DrFill
  • toykickstoykicks Member Posts: 95
    i see a lot of tundras towing. Theres a hell of a lot more chevys and gmc trucks out there. Millions actually the sierra and silverado combined are close or over a million trucks a year thats more then the f150 now 2-3 years of gm trucks thats 3+ million of course your going to see some doing some farm work in the middle of no where since they come easy. Toyotas gotten into the big 3s sweet spot and their only selling 150-200k trucks a year and arnt doing that bad and a lot of people are finding out toyota sandbagged this sucker. I would like to see how the chevy would do in a head on crash with a similar tundra. Tundras weight 500-600 pounds more then the a fully loaded 6.o silvy.
  • 12ozcurls12ozcurls Member Posts: 65
    Towing what, jet-skis? I'm talkin about real towing, real work and off-road play...The point i was trying to make is not that the new tundra isn't capable, but the the type of buyer who purchases these trucks aren't the type that are going to actually use their trucks as trucks...
  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    toykicks,

    You are mixing apples & oranges here. I made it clear that I was making an observation about the 07s *only*. I am NOT referring to previous years' sales, so your 3+ million trucks reference is completely irrelevant. If you are being purposely obtuse, then stop it, OK?

    The 07 Tundras I observed were towing/hauling/working at NOTHING. They were all CITY TRUCKS. The 07 Silverados & Sierras (mostly Silverados BTW) were in large measure on farms, ranches, etc.

    I live in the Los Angeles area. I actually see quite a few 07 Tundras, but they are not doing any work, except hauling their owners back and forth to jobs in the city. They are commuter vehicles. If Toyota wants to ultimately be successful in the truck segment they will need to crack the work market, and they aren't doing that, at least not yet. Perhaps, in time, they will.

    That was my entire point.

    As far as a head to head crash, what I am going to say will make you very sad, but that's life. That crash test was recently done by NHTSA and Tundra came in LAST(!) against the Big 3. Dodge, Chevy, and Ford all got 5 stars, Tundra got 4 stars. Do you understand Tundra=LAST in a head-on crash test??? The ratings mean that the Tundra was twice as likely to result in a serious injury or death to the driver. Don't believe me? Google it, or check these boards!

    1offroader
  • gotoyotagotoyota Member Posts: 280
    Point well taken and I appreciate your thought. But in all fairness, Toyota had a couple of years of recalls and everyone is jumping all over them (I haven't heard anything about a recall for shaky suspensions, just the ball joint issue). Lets not ignore the fact that millions of Chevy's and Fords have been recalled over the years as well. Personally, I don't hold recalls against any carmaker - I see them as a good thing. Having a manufacturing background, I know how a supplier can really screw things up, even when you have done everything humanly possible to ensure all will go as planned. Recalls are a way for a manufacturer to take responsibility and own their mistakes, as well they should. Ford has had its share of of problems during recent years, and so has Chevy. My last GM needed a new engine at 80K. I was pissed when that happened, because it wasn't my fault and it was due to a problem they knew existed but did nothing about it. Sure, Toyota had a sludging problem with it's 2.2L and 3.0L engines... My mother in law had one that blew, but she NEVER changed the oil, either, and it lasted through 130k miles of her abuse and neglect. When it happened, Toyota sent her a letter - on their own accord - notifying her that they regretted the situation and would be willing to reimburse her for the incurred costs if she could verify that she'd at least changed the oil once every 15K miles!! I think that shows a lot of integrity. There was a reasonable explanation as to why the engines were failing that I don't want to go into right now because it isn't going to change anyones mind anyway... GM has literally had hundreds of thousands of engine failures in the last ten to fifteen years because of faulty intake gaskets, or dex-cool, or whatever it turned out to be. I was one of those cases. Point is, no manufacturer is perfect and no machine is 100% reliable... but Toyota's line is the most dependable over the long term, especially when all models are considered. GM and Ford have had some that are very good, but they have not been consistent accross all models. Perceptions are different as well. People have different expecations for their cars and what one person would report as a problem, another person wouldn't. I've heard people tell me things as crazy as "I never had any problems with it... just the transmission had to be replaced at 60K... other than that it has been perfect." There are always some good apples and some bad ones - as a buyer, you simply have to look at a manufacturers track record and assess the risk and make your choice based on the facts. And if you're smart you pick the one that has a reputation for having mostly good ones. And... you probably didn't hear a lot of bragging from the previous Tundra owners because they knew their trucks really didn't compete with real full size trucks, but were more designed as a truck that a Tacoma driver could "graduate" to. The new one is a credible threat to GM, Ford and Dodge half tons, and that's why everyone is trashing it. As for the bed shake, it does look pretty bad in the video, but I don't know that it means the truck is designed badly - it just doesn't look good in that particular test. I saw it looking pretty dang good in the pull tests, which i would think is more applicable.
  • gotoyotagotoyota Member Posts: 280
    That's probably accurate. I know I'm not ever going to take one into the mud unless I have to. Heck, if I spend that much on a new truck, I'm not beating it up :shades: But I would use it to haul a boat (or maybe jet ski's) and for occasional trips to Home Depot, etc. Maybe Toyota designed it to appeal to people like myself? I dunno. But I sure like it and if I did buy one it would be because I occasionally need a truck to haul stuff, but still want something that goes from 0-60 in 6.0 seconds too. For me, the Tundra is the perfect fit. And I actually DO like the new Silverado and the F150 quite a lot, but if I bought one of those, it would be decked out with all the goodies, like 20" rims so it would handle more like a car, but then I would want it to go faster and have more gears.... so yeah, I'm one of the people who would never use it for a work truck, but I can still have one, can't I?
  • 12ozcurls12ozcurls Member Posts: 65
    hahaha for sure man, it's all good. It just pisses me off when some toyota guys act like their vehicles are the best thing since silicon implants. It's all up to the potential owner. For me, I go off road and beat the living crap out of my truck so naturally I'm not going to get something new or fancy whatever the brand, it just all depends. And as far as recalls go, I'm surely aware of the big 3 and their recalls. Every car company has their problems, especially these days as cars and trucks get ever more complicated. But as i said before, some act like their rigs are perfect, especially sum of the Toyota guys. I was simply trying to remeind everyone that they have their problems as well. I have a '98 Chevy K2500 with a lift and big tires, in case anyone was wondering where I'm comming from....
  • dustykdustyk Member Posts: 2,926
    That was a sophomoric demonstration of the laws of physics.

    The truck on the left (the video quality was not that good) lost cohesion (ie: reduced friction) with the road surface as soon as the tires started to spin on the pavement. The blue truck could then more easily pull the black truck forward despite the black trucks wheels spinning against the direction of pull.

    Notice that the black truck could no longer pull the blue truck as soon as the blue truck driver applied the brakes. Prior to that, when engine power was applied through the transmission torque converters, neither truck was going anywhere.

    The only thing this test proves is that some people have too much free time on their hands and others are extremely naive.

    Dusty
  • gotoyotagotoyota Member Posts: 280
    What does naive mean :shades:
  • toykickstoykicks Member Posts: 95
    yeah Government crash tests also show that people shouldnt compare vehicles Crash test results with others which have a 400+ & - pound difference which the Gm twins do and dodge also. Side impact air bags are optional on the GM twins which means that 5 star crash rating isnt any better then a 4 star car. When you get t boned by a vehicle which has its bumper/grill by your head it only takes 30 mph to kill you without a side impact airbag.

    as for the 3 million comment you wernt specific. Combined 07 GM twin models are at over 700k Tundra 124k? year to date does that answer your question? ;)
  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    toykicks

    I don't have a question, other than "Do you read a post thoroughly before spouting off?" My post was completely clear if you'd bothered to read it. Suggest you go back and do so. Next time I'll type more s-l-o-w-l-y so you'll understand.

    As to the side air bags, I have them. They are an option, and I ordered it. I also have OnStar, which is standard, and which will call an ambulance if my air bag deploys and they can't contact me. Did you order that on your Tundra? Oh, wait...not even an option.

    You seem to be kinda sensitive to the Tundra's LAST PLACE finish in the frontal crash test. Why is that?

    1offroader
  • toykickstoykicks Member Posts: 95
    Onstar isnt free :P if you dont pay them you can kiss your butt dead once your free trail is up. The tundra isnt last place. It did pretty well considering the weight disadvantage The axles on new tundras arnt made to break off like the old ones but the engine mounts and steering column are they scored the tundra above average in hwy crash tests which isnt bad. I wouldnt consider a GM product any way. It took them 5 years to work out all of their Problems out on old powertrains which they passed on to the 07s and im not judging by what people post online on forums. Just ask your local GM mechanic how many transmission they would have to rebuild to reband rubber into their trannys :P yeah we can go there ;) .
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    A good friend of mine was a service manager for a GMC dealer in NH. I guess the old 800 transmissions were problematic, but even worse was the rear axle whine and brake issues. Both those trucks and his wifes current Suburban had the ISS replacments a few times as well.

    Even with an entire service bay at his disposal, he still managed to jump ship on a new Tundra DC back in March. Didn't even give the new truck a chance (We looked briefly when I went shopping with him but put off by reliability concerns). Plus the trucks are just fugly looking, especially the smiley-faced Silverado.

    Carry on :shades:
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    I've lost count on the number of times you've told that same "my friend was a service manager for a GMC dealer". Don't you get tired of repeating yourself or do you do a copy and paste from some word program? Sheesh!!! ;)
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    Before you start the flames, let me once again say that I've owned 2 Toyotas, 1 of which was really good (1985) and one of which was mediocre at best (1992). But at least they both had relatively beefy fully boxed frames considering they were "mini-trucks". The riveted c-channel Tundra frame is a huge step backward. Why would Toyota do that? To save on cost maybe? I dunno, but it's a mistake in terms of durability and a marketing blunder, if what you're trying to do is appeal to the American truck owner who needs a working machine that will last.

    Once again, a good marketing strategy by Ford. When you strip a vehicle down you really get to see what's underneath. The Tundra is wearin' a thong under them fancy duds, I'm tellin' ya


    One thing you can't really accuse Toyota of is marketing blunders.

    Having sold quite a few '07 Tundras this year, the ads bring in traffic! The marketing is working. Sales are up more than 50% YTD. And GM is rethinking their market strategy, after being shown how to sell a redesigned truck by Toyota (The new GM's are actually down 7% YTD). :surprise:

    http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2007/08/02/057062.html

    And patting Ford on the back doesn't make a whole lot of sense, as their new marjeting campaign only came about when Toyota took HUGE MARKET SHARE CHUNKS out of Ford's portfolio. If you look up sales, pretty much every sales Toyota has picked up has come at the expense of F-150.

    And the 2009 F-150 is not going to sport a 5.4 Triton replacement, so it will get worse before it gets better at Ford. :sick:
    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=121668#3

    Regarding the why's and the what's, the Tundra does have the best towing in it's class, and that is a big deal. The '09 F-150 and Ram will be benchmarking the Tundra when their new (Not exactly new in Ford's case) trucks get here next year.

    Selling a Tundra against a domestic is exceedingly easy, as I've done it. They targeted 3/4 tons in design and interior styling, and looked to set new standards in interior features and safety.

    Making a Ram/F-150 look unsafe, by comparison, helps sell a few. :blush:

    The transmission loop in the GM cripples that truck, so the 6.2 needs to overcome that deficit pronto!

    The domestics did score with the NHTSA tests, but the IIHS test is the standard. Much harder test to pass. Tundra has always built a safe truck. :blush:

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=70

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/earliermodels.aspx?class=70

    You have to work hard, and be dedicated, to get hurt in a head on collision in a 5k truck. Rollovers are the real issue with these vehicles, and Toyota has more safety features than any vehicle in the class, with TRAC, Brake assist, and VSC standard.

    When you are up 50-60%, and everyone else is down, that's sayin' somethin about the truck. Getting to 200k is a big deal! Toyota has made a major dent in the market in a flat/declining truck market. Now the Big 3 are sweatin' bullets!

    Whether anyone wants to admit that or not.....

    DrFill
  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102
    I will agree when you simply look at percentages, the Tundra is doing well. But what does that really mean? The Tundra is a completely different truck than the 1st gen Tundra, which was a failure as a full-size truck. Do you really believe the 50-60% will be sustainable? Also, the numbers (150-200K) are still very small and the only way they will mean anything is if Toyota can SUSTAIN these percentages over a long period of time. A 1-year snapshot does not tell the whole story, especially when the competition is releasing new redesigns as well. Yes, Tundra is conquesting sales from Ford's F150, but will they continue to do so when the newly designed F150 comes out, or the newly designed Dodge Ram comes out? Only time will tell. I am guessing not. This "spike" is indicative of a brand new truck being released and the "hype" will wear off, just like it did with the T100 and the 1st gen Tundra.
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    Perhaps a little closer look at the sales numbers.

    Toyota Tundra
    July 2007: 23,150
    August 2007: 18,919

    Hmmm...what could this be saying? That you took a vacation for the month of August and didn't sell your usual 5k trucks?
  • gotoyotagotoyota Member Posts: 280
    Or, it could be that the full size truck buying public, which has traditionally had three manufacturers to choose from, is simply not immediately welcoming to the new Tundra and want to wait it out a little. I'm sure there are disgruntled Ford, Chev and Dodge customers that are now buying Tundras, and probably a lot of them are Toyota loyals who naturally buy the Tundra because it's a Toyota. But, to assume the Tundra will simply become another Nissan Titan would be a mistake. I would wager that sales will hold steady if not gradually increase. There's always a crop of ready buyers when a new model comes out, so it's natural for sales to level off after the initial surge. But the current Tundra has staying power - it has one of the highest power ratings, some of the best economy numbers, and comes from the manufacturer recognized the world over (except maybe here in this forum) for leading the industry in long term quality. Fortunately, all of the full size trucks are very good now, so there's plenty of good choices out there, but I wouldn't write off any product from the most admired and studied car manufacturer in the world. It may not become the best selling truck in America (and probably won't) but it will still be there and I'd be very surprised if Tundra sales miss the conservative mark set by Toyota.
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    This "spike" is indicative of a brand new truck being released and the "hype" will wear off, just like it did with the T100 and the 1st gen Tundra

    Not exactly.

    1. Toyota wanted to sell 125k Tundras in the previous generation. They did that every year, consistently.

    2. GM's trucks also came out last year, but have fallen on their face, and Sierra has been out sold by Tundra half the time!

    3. Toyota isn't looking to grow 50% a year for the next 5 years. Toyota doesn't need Tundra to make money. They make money hand over fist with everything they build!

    This can be a pet project for them. Tundra doesn't make ot break Toyota. For the domestics, it's do or die.

    There is NO EXCUSE for the new GM's to be losing share, in chunks, to the Toyota. they just aren't losing as fast as F-150. :mad:

    The Tundra will level off at 225k a year or so. Which is fine with them.

    Prius and Tundra are HUGE HITS for toyota, not that they need a hit. :blush:

    DrFill
  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102
    Yes, GM's trucks are new, but not a completely different truck like the Tundra is. This is the first real full size truck for Toyota, and Toyota loyalists have ONE choice in full sized trucks, no HD's. So, of course their sales will spike the first year, people have been waiting for a full sizer from Toyota for years.

    So, by saying Toyota "wanted' to sell 125K/yr of the old Tundra's, are you saying they did NOT want to sell more than that? I don't see your point here?

    I agree the Tundra will probably level off at 225K/yr in the next couple of years, assuming they fix the issues they are having currently. But I do not see how an extra 100K/yr vs the old Tundra is going to make much of an impact on the domestics overall sales, especially if Toyota does not introduce a HD/Diesel Tundra.

    How can the Tundra be a "Huge Hit" for Toyota when it only sells 200K.....total, it's not even sold outside the USA. I'd say it's a pretty small moneymaker when you look at the big (global) picture.

    The marketshare lost to F150 is only because the F150 is nearing the end of it's current generation. Once the new F150 rolls off the line, then we'll see how many sales are lost to the Tundra.

    GM's sales are not down for any other reason than the fact that gas prices are high and housing market is down (construction companies are not buying them right now). Don't kid yourself into assuming it's because people are buying the Tundra instead of the GM. I would bet that Tundra conquest sales account for very few lost GM sales.
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    So, by saying Toyota "wanted' to sell 125K/yr of the old Tundra's, are you saying they did NOT want to sell more than that? I don't see your point here?

    I don't understand your point. Toyota sets a goal, and reaches it, cosistently. Now you want to penalize them for not overshooting their goal? :confuse:

    But I do not see how an extra 100K/yr vs the old Tundra is going to make much of an impact on the domestics overall sales, especially if Toyota does not introduce a HD/Diesel Tundra.

    You just hit the bullseye! ;)

    The will have gained 100k in a receeding market, without having to build an additional line of trucks. That's progress.

    And finally:

    How can the Tundra be a "Huge Hit" for Toyota when it only sells 200K.....total, it's not even sold outside the USA. I'd say it's a pretty small moneymaker when you look at the big (global) picture.

    The Tundra's main objective is to show the domestics, to show America, that they can build a more-than-competitive full-sized truck. That's the "Hit". Toyota has done it.

    It can take Toyota 10-15 years to reach Chevy/Ford sales numbers. And that is fine. Toyota has two things the domestics don't.

    Money and patience. This is not life or death for Toyota. They are the tortoise (sic). They are thinking 10 years from now. The domestics never did, and now don't have that luxury. :(

    The Silvy/Sierra is a fine truck. I've driven it. Quiet, car-like. But if you drive the Tundra, and have a good salesman show you what's what, you will pause before getting ANY domestic truck. Mission accomplished. ;)

    Selling against a domestic truck is very easy. They are good, but the GM's have holes big enough to drive a Tundra thru, if you know where to look. :blush:

    DrFill
This discussion has been closed.