Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Toyota Tundra Problems
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
My current Chevy - 34 months & 30K - 2 trips to dealer - but nothing major.
OK - to be honest - my Chevys have not been perfect - minor rattles in the dash, a clunk in the drive line every once in a while, a speaker that sounds like crap when I turn the bass up - but I have never been left on the side of the road. That is more than I can say for the last Toyota I owned.
For me, Toyota over the years earned a spot due to its reliability and quality. An overwhelming majority of people I know are quite happy with theirs. I just hope that after hearing some of the more recent issues about customer dis-satisfaction with dealers and other minor things, that Toyota's long time reputation isn't starting to slowly tarnish. I will say this though, I've been reading posts in other discussions, and the Toyota problems still seem much milder than a good amount of the American trucks.
The Tundra is not a prefect truck, but it is as near to perfect as could be. Every time I drive my Tundra I am impressed by its abilities.
Today I towed my SE-R to San Diego. I was doing 75-80 all the way. I was in OD almost all of the time and had the AC on and was passing traffic left and right. It felt as if I was towing nothing. This truck is a beast.
I have close to 4K on the truck and the only thing I have to complain about is a rattle from the passanger side seat belt that is intermittent and a rattle from the passanger side dash board when I hit a BIG bump and I mean big enough to unsettle the suspension.
One more thing I am experiencing is the poor reception on the radio. On occasion the radio skips the channel it is locked to. I do not know if it is the weather or if the antenna is loose.
These are all minor things compared to what most dodge/chevy/ford owners experience.
"These are all minor things compared to what most dodge/chevy/ford owners experience."
15000 miles on my 2001 Chevy 1500 and NO repairs or warranty issues at all-including shaking and warped brakes. And no, I don't use my parking brake every time I park my truck. Ridiculous to think you can ruin the brakes on a fullsize 30K 1/2 ton pickup by not using the parking brake every time you park it. And I thought the Tundra is hands-down the most well built 1/2 ton on the market??
And no, I don't care that this is a "Tundra only" thread!
I would never never never buy anything made by GM. I think their quality control is poor to horrible at best and would not take the chance with my hard earned money.
Hill-Sure there are people who CLAIM that they own perfectly flawless chevies but there are many many many others who own perfectly f'd up lemons manufactured by GM. These facts are proven time after time by the consumer reporting industry also. Look at the number of posts in the silverado problems topic compared to the number of posts here. Does that tell you something? Read through some of those posts; you'll see people with transmission failures, major engine problems and even dash fires. Read through this thread and you'll find problems like, brake vibrations, windows that rattle and slow seat belt retractors. Tell me, which vehicle would you rather own? Don't bother to answer, you've made your choice we've made ours. Why don't you go help put out the dash fire of some poor chevy owner and spare us your diatribe on all the flawed Tundras you've "heard/read" about.
Frankly, with all of these well-documented brake problems from Tundras, I get a little nervous when I see one closing in behind me at a stop light!
Second, the Tundra runs a drum rear unit. It has a star adjuster. I believe you need to use your parking brake to reset the brake bias front/rear.
Third, even with drum brakes the Tundra has shorter stoping distances than the 4 disc brake rado that you have. Just read the numbers from truck trend or even from Edmunds.
Fourth, there has been two recalls on Rado brakes in 99-2000 and none for the Tundra. There has been a TSB only for the Tundra.
Fifth, pound for pound the Tundra has less problems than a Rado. It is documented. Look at all the TSBs and recalls for the rad vs. the Tundra. Do a search and you will find more TSBs/Recalls on the Rado than the Tundra. Read what Edmunds had to say about their long term experience with their Sierra. Pretty pathetic. There is a whole lemon site for Chevy truck owners and there is not one for the Tundra.
Sixth, we have been through this before. Please stay away from our thread and we will stay away from yours.
"My last Chevy truck trans lasted 40K easy no-tow miles. Cost $2325 to replace. Chevy dealer was so helpful to point out that if reliability was important to me, I should have bought a Toyota. Dealer was Bayside Chevrolet/Toyota in Prince Frederick, MD. I don't go there anymore, YMMV."
A tranny that only lasts 40K. LMAO. And a dealer that tells their customer to go get a Toyota if they want reliability. ROTFLMAO.
Reminds me of a story. When my GF went to buy a seat recliner latch to replace the broken one on her seat for the Explorer, she complained to the dealer that it broke way too early. The parts rep tells he "what do you expect, it is a Ford."
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.
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.
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.
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.
"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!!
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
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.
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.
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!!!!!
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
You're right though, you should use it because that's what its there for.
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.
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??
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?
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.
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.
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!!
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.
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!
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.
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...
Thin sheet metal? Hmm - the Tundra weighs within 200lb of the Shakerado. They must be stretching the steel mighty thin in that Chev of yours.
Truck Trend rated the Tundra best for towing when compared with your Shakerado.
Trailer Life hooked up 6500lb to the Tundra and towed it through the Sierra Nevadas in mid summer and proclaimed that it was very capable.
Automobile magazine 36000 mi. long-term test with a Tundra. Not one repair!
Motor Trend long term test on the Tundra - not one repair!
For comparison sake read Edmunds long term GM test - the WORST vehicle they EVER tested! It literally fell apart.
Car and Driver did a long term test on a Shakerado and had both power windows fail, power seat fail, leaking differential, intermediate steering shaft etc. Just to name a few. They said the brakes reminded them of a '78 Impala.
Just toying with you buddy,but seriously,SLOW DOWN when you're towing ! With 4000 lb on your bumper your stopping distance DOUBLES !
BAMA your weight figures are still off ,just like last nite and this morning.
kip
Since your Tundra is perfect, why don't you see if you can offer some words of comfort to this poor guy:
jimedwards Feb 15, 2002 4:14pm
800 lbs??
However, from reading some of the horror stories from the Silverado owners threads and all the experiences of friends and family who have owned GM along with my experience with GM cars and trucks in my 8 years in the car rental business I have a very very very strong bias against GM. Hey that's my experience and I would say that it's quite a bit more than most and enough for me to make some qualified statements about GM quality. I don't really see any evidence that anything has changed at GM in recent years either. I have equally if not stronger feelings about Hyundai cars and nothing in recent history will change my opinion of the crap that they spew out either.
I don't think the Tundra is bulletproof but I do think it is best 1/2 ton truck in its class.
Thanks for the tip, losangelesemt. If I would have known about or checked carsdirect.com, I would have solicited a quote from them. Nonetheless, I'm pretty satisfied.
We've owned 3 Chevy trucks in the past ten years, and they have all been quality vehicles. Had a minor wiper problem with the first S10 Blazer but no nightmare stories The Silverado has been perfect so far, and overall it's the best 1/2 ton for the money in my opinion. Catch you later.
AK - I agree that Toyota could definitely work on adding plow option, it could only be a plus i think. I'm not sure if the guys at Toyota thought over all the possible options for this truck and compared with contenders and decided the ones they currently offer are the best for this truck and said screw it to the rest of possible options, or they just never thought to offer them in the first place.
Bama - Got a good chuckle from your post ... any newer truck with brakes that are compared to a 78 Impala, just might be in trouble lol. I've recently experienced the Shakerado and more importantly its brakes. It beats walkin, but the bicycle comes to mind some days.