HONEST OPINIONS: Are Toyota's Pickups Just as Good as The Big Three?

sc0rpi0

You all gotta realize that tundra is basically a first-generation fullsize pickup from Toyota. T100.....well, sort of counts, sort of doesnt.
Give it time. All trucks go through this phase. Couple years from now Tundra will get a bigger engine, work out the suspension kinks, and then we can take a look, it's not really fair to compare old dogs to pups, is it? I guess Tundra at this point is like Infinity Q45 of the SUVs...got a 4x4, but you really don't want to take it offroad.

eagle63

"Blind loyalty and especially ignorance has nothing to do with it. To me someone who drives a truck with a one star side impact rating has more to do with the term ignorant...don't you agree?"

-what truck has a 1 star side impact rating?

obyone

Pluto owns the Tacoma that earned the NHTSA's one star side impact rating.

http://www.nhtsa.com/NCAP/Cars/2000Pkup.html

http://www.nhtsa.com/NCAP/Cars/1999Pkup.html

tbunder

you asked for hard facts. i provided them. maybe your magazine article had trucks with different options on them than what could have been on them for maximum output. but all you have to do is go to the link i provided and punch in tundra and F150 and compare the numbers. make sure you scroll on down to the 4x4's. then, read and weep. and besides these numbers, i went to the ford site and built an F150. there is an additional payload and gvwr package which you can get/equip with the 5.4 engine (i know, you're thinking WOW!, a 5.4?) which gives the F150 a payload capability of 3300 lbs. and GVWR of 7700, which are tops in this size of truck. to be honest, the Tundra is more on par with a decked out ranger in terms of towing and payload than it is with an F150. my ranger can tow nearly 6000 lbs. (5650)and haul around 1500lbs.

www.carpoint.com

what you got to say now?

ndahi12

we are comparing, otherwise this is not going to work. You cannot pick the biggest block engine that the F150 offers and make a comparison with a lower displacement engine from the Tundra. Is it too much to ask that you pick the 4.6L enigne from the F150 and I pick the 4.7L engine from the Tundra? 4.6 is closer to 4.7 than 4.7 is to 5.4. Even the power output is closer.

With that in mind the maximum towing of the Tundra 4X2 SR5 is 7200 lbs, maximum payload is 2011 lbs. The GVWR is 6200 lbs.

The Ford F150 XLT super cab short bed(similar to the SR5 trim) 4X2 has a maximum towing of 7200 lbs and maximum payload of 2060 lbs. The GVWR is 6050. Again this is with the 4.6L engine.

Now if you step up to the 5.4L engine, then the F150 will tow more and have more payload. What else would you expect from a bigger engine. Unfortunately Toyota does not have a 5.4L engine in its truck, so we cannot do a proper comparison. Didn't most domestic guys coin the phrase "there is no replacemnet for displacemnt?"

Still if you like to make the comparo I will oblige you. So the F150 supercab lariat short bed comes with the V8 5.4L triton has a max towing cpapcity of 8600 lbs, payload of 3010 lbs and a GVWR of 7700 lbs. But the price of this truck climbs to 28,703 at INVOICE and that is w/o the special packages the ford sells.

tbunder

im not sure where you're getting your numbers, but im just doing the max everything. not sure what maximum towing of the 4.6 is. i have a ranger, but i do believe that ford makes the best full-size trucks hands down, and the most capable. my truck is an '01 ranger 4x4 with the 207 horse SOHC 4.0 engine and off-road pkg. i just like to rub its power in to the tacoma guys faces. they always come back with this "but i can get a supercharger as an option and it pushes output to 260 horse". and almost all of these toyota guys who claim this as a "factory option", don't even know how to go about getting one. nor would they ever. i really like to debate stuff, if you want me to, i can get a brochure of the F150 to find out what its 4.6 can tow. i basically wanted to prove that the F150 is a more versatile truck for the owner's needs, since it can be ordered with so many different powertrains and options as compared to the plain jane but overpriced tundra. and i think i did just that, as you already proved. )

boaz47

Tundra is designed to come out and play with the big boys. It is a much better job that the T-100 ever was. But the market it has entered is the heavy weight one. Full sized trucks, Toyota makes that claim and some of us accept it. If a person is talking about Jet fighters and how fast and how high they can fly would they ever say that it is unfair to compare the best one produced by France to the Best one made in the US because the one from the US comes with a more powerful engine? To restrict the Full sized trucks produced by the "Big Three" to the same configuration of the Tundra is called handicapping. To the politically correct in the world everything should be handicapped. But in the real world handicapping isn't what we want. Someday Tundra may come with the bigger engine needed for the kind of work the others are designed to do. The advantage the big three have is they offer an option if the truck you want needs to be more powerful. Some might say it is not fair to compare trucks with more powerful engines but that is not the fault of the Big three. Toyota decided on the size engine they wanted to put in their truck and that is the true test here. The reason people buy so many domestics is because they can get just what they want in an engine, not just what the manufacturer decides is all the engine you need. If you make Tundra the standard and declare anything that exceeds that standard as being unfair you have stacked the deck. If you want a bigger engine or a heavier duty truck does Toyota offer a bigger engine for the Tundra? If the answer is no and you need a bigger engine where do you go? Right now the only answer is a domestic. If you want a five speed automatic does Tacoma have one? If the answer is no you might have to look at a Ranger. Is that unfair? Well maybe, but then that is what the free market is all about. The truth is, you reach into your wallet and you put your money on what you want. Right now 90 percent of light Truck buyers put their money on domestics in the US. In September people in the US bought 7,412,360 for a 89.04 percent of market share. Imports sold 912,568 or 10.96 percent share. As you may know October was a water shed for domestic trucks so the market share may have gone either way. The point is, the buying public seems to want what the domestics offer. 89 percent of the buyers are saying that Toyota is not quite up to the Big three yet. Not saying they never will be. (sales figures reported by Morgan and Company INC.)

plutonious

Tbunder, first of all, according to Edmunds, the F-150 is built in Kansas City, Missouri and Cuautitlan, Mexico. See for yourself.

I absolutely agree with the majority of what's been said here tonight. I just read through 23 new messages!

I disagree with what people said about Edmunds, JD Powers and Consumer Reports, though. Ever see those little charts with the red circles with dots, blank circles and black circles? Those charts itemize vehicle systems and the problems they have had. When you look at Toyota products, everything is excellent and above average, based on non-biased studies of the vehicles in question. To put it short, Toyota vehicles have all red (meaning excellent) while Chevy has almost all black (meaning problems). Ignore it if you want, call it opinion, etc. Just rememerber, Toyota is NOTED for quality and reliability, versus the others who ADVERTISE it (Ford= quality is job #1 and Chevy = like a rock/the most dependable, longest lasting trucks...) Sorry, I don't fall for advertisements.

In conclusion, it seems the only way the domestics are better than Toyota is when they compare something bigger to the Toyota that can out-tow it. But when you directly compare Toyota to similar products, it wins.

But in time, Toyota will probably offer more options and heavier duty trucks. What then?

quadrunner500

Aren't you simply being arbitrary? Why does anyone have to limit the terms to suit that criteria for comparison? The simple fact is, that Ford DOES have the 5.4L Triton, does have higher towing and payload, and Toyota doesn't have anything that can compare with it.

>Some of the posters did not even learn from their mistake of buying a chevy. So they went and bought another Chevy Sliverado. What is the logic here? I really want to know. Why would you ever buy a chevy again? <

Here's why: 300 hp, 520 ft/lbs, 32 valves, turbocharged, intercooled, 23 mpg, 700 mile range, 15,800 towing, 3908 payload, 100k warranty

ROFLAMAO!

http://vsdrives.com/graphics/2035002.jpg

quadrunner500

Allow me to add:

Motor Trend
Silverado 2500HD - 2001 Truck of the Year

plutonious

admit Toyota makes nothing than can compare with your dismal lemon 1999 Silverado!

quadrunner500

Better run for the border.

Taco Bell got your order! (LOL!)

chevytruck_fan

quad I thought you bougt the new one because you wanted more towing capacity?

quadrunner500

Well, that's the '99 Z71 Silverado pictured. With locking axle, it traversed the frozen tundra, a place too slippy for tindra's open diffy.

txyank1

one is comparing the Tundra to the Dakota. Or is it really closer to the Full-sized than to a Dakota?

1997montez34

I parked my '00 Silverado Z71 next to a Tundra at a local dealer. The Tundra looked like an S-10 next to my truck, and there's no way it can touch my 5.3L V-8. The Tundra looks like a more refined F-150, but smaller. I guess if I wanted a Camry that towed it might be okay, but for real towing and truck looks I don't think the Silverado/Sierra can be beat!. BTW, 22K in 1 year, heavy towing, and NO PROBLEMS! GM IS BACK!

chevytruck_fan

quad but isn't that why you traded your truck in?

sc0rpi0

How much oil do Chevy trucks drink between oil changes? I heard dodge is really bad at that. Just wondering, the 93' S10 I had didn't drink any oil, but it had enough problems of its own to justify me getting rid of it.

gator36

perceptable oil loss on my 01 Ext Cab 5.3l
11,000 miles and only been in the shop for
lubes and tire rotations.

jim4444

At 36,000 miles.

dch0300

Zero - oil loss or consumption.
Zero - recalls.
Zero - trips to the shop.
Zero - rattles, shakes, wind noise, cold start knocking, transmission slipping, etc.
Zero - problems what-so-ever!

My 2001 Silverado 1500, LS, ext-cab, Z-71, 5.3L, 3.73, lock diff, etc. now is 11 months old, has 8,400 miles on it, and has been flawless since day one. It seats 4 adults and 2 children just fine, and not just on short trips either.
Too bad those so called "Truck Reviewers" didn't get their hands on a truck built with the initial quality that mine has. They'd be fighting over them keys all of the time.

No regrets, and still smiling...
-David

plutonious

factor in getting a "good" Chevy and a "bad" one, huh?

Read Edmunds' review of their Sierra. I guess they had bad luck.

quadrunner500

Read Motor Trend's Review...Silverado 2001 Truck of the Year. Time to move on.

eagle63

I guess they did something different on the '01 tacomas, as they have a 3 star rating.

plutonious

out and got a "good" one and not a "bad" one?

Obyone and Quad (or whoever keeps commenting on my 1998 Tacoma's side-impact rating): You never told me how the 1998 S-10 compared safety wise to the Tacoma. I'm still waiting.

ndahi12

"im not sure where you're getting your numbers, but im just doing the max everything. not sure what maximum towing of the 4.6 is."

I got my numbers from carpoint, the same palce you got yours. And I looked at both the 4.6L and the Triton V8 in the Lariat.

"i really like to debate stuff, if you want me to, i can get a brochure of the F150 to find out what its 4.6 can tow."

Good, please do. I like to debate as long as people are civil with each other and do not resort to negativism. I am not saying that you did, BTW.

"i basically wanted to prove that the F150 is a more versatile truck for the owner's needs, since it can be ordered with so many different powertrains and options"

I agree with you. The F150 has more diversity of options. But you have to agree with me that real data (not I feel...) shows that the Tundra is as powerful as the F150 and in acceleration and handling even better than the F150. Edmunds data shows it and so does Consumer Roperts which does not take advertising.

CR testing has shown that the 4.7L Tundra can tow a 7000 lbs trailer 0-60 in 25 seconds. The 2000 XLT F150 5.4L did the same chore with 27 Seconds. These are facts from the best consumer magazine in the US.

With the 5.4L engine the F150 has a bigger payload and larger towing capacity. But that is a more expensive truck than the Tundra. Both Edmunds and CR say so.

"as compared to the plain jane but overpriced tundra. and i think i did just that, as you already proved. )"

Again you make statments without backing them up. I optioned an F150 with the 4.6 L similar to the options on my Tundra and I got an invoice price of 23,109 at carsdirect.com. The invoice on my truck was 23,300 and I got the LSD on my 2002 which was not an option on the F150 4.6L engine. So how is the Tundra overpriced?

You guys need to start backing up your blanket statments with some data

jcmdie

My '98 Dodge Ram has 58,000 miles and uses no oil. I have heard of no Dodge owners complaining of oil consumption. Gasoline- now thats a different story.

boaz47

I often wonder why people quote reviews in many of these forums. I don't know many that ever buy a car or truck because they got a good review form a magazine or consumer report book. Everyone I know goes out and test drives the car or truck they want and then tries to get the best price. If you look to JD powers you can pick what you want to look at and say that it proves you picked the best vehicle. If you want the highest rated customer service and sales satisfaction you would buy a Saturn or Lexus. But then the Nissan people would tell you customer service and sales satisfaction aren't important. Volkswagen owners haven't been in the top half in sales satisfaction in as many years as they have been making surveys. So what do reviews prove? That people that don't drive cars or trucks you or I would own have an opinion? Have you ever seen articles on what people that work for Motor Trend or C&D drive? Even Peterson's tend not to drive what we would expect. Most of us buy a Vehicle and then look at the reviews and see if we agree. Two of my employees have Toyota trucks. One is a Tacoma V-6 and the other is a 4- runner V-6. Both have had their exhaust manifolds replaced. Did they ever read in any review that this might be a problem? Nope. Does that make Toyota trucks bad? Nope. But you know what? That manifold problem counts as one problem just like a defective radiator cap does on a Chevy or a defective master brake cylinder would on a Ford Truck. I have a friend that has a 56 Ford ½ ton. He has replaced the rear end twice but would never trade that truck in. Two other friends I have own a 1956 Dodge ½ ton and a 53 Chevy ½ ton. All three are still running and all three can buy parts to fix them. Now if you wanted to buy a truck and talked to one of these men what do you think they would recommend? Would any of us buy a new truck based on the experience of these three people? Knowing my fellow truck owners I would say, we would not. We would go test drive all of our options and buy what we liked based on what we needed. The true test is based on truck to truck, not review to review. The guys that write those reviews for JD powers and consumers report wear pocket protectors after all. Most of us wouldn't have a beer with them.

ghulet

I think if I wanted a truck to actually use as a truck, I'd probably buy a Chevy or Ford (don't know which, sorry). The only experience I've had with either are with my grandpa's 71 C20 Longhorn (with a badass 350 4v) and my uncle's 87 Ford F150 with a 6 and 5-speed. Neither are exactly current. I think a Toyota is probably more trouble-free than big-three (like their cars), but definitely more of a 'gentlemen's truck.' I don't think their suspensions are as tough or durable.

chevytruck_fan

lol yeah the best consumer magazine if you hate domestics, there is biased in that magazine for shure, as there is in any magazine. Consumer reports likes to tell you what to buy, they don't even test HD Chevy, Ford's or Dodges, why not?

I think what people don't want to relize is the tundra is meant for a totally differnt segment that the domestic trucks, most of the tundra buyers are first time truck buyers who had toyotas and would have still been driving a car because of their hatred for the big 3, toyota isn't really going after Big 3 customers.

plutonious

I like Consumer Reports. It shows you the reliability history of vehicle systems/componets for past model years of vehicles. If Chevy trucks were found to have defective brakes 35% of the time and Toyota 2% of the time, and that information is published, what is so biased about that?

Now, I couldn't care less about a lot of Motor Trend and Car & Driver's reviews. Car & Driver on TV with that Jim Stout guy (is that his name? -it's the same guy on "American Shooter" I believe) has to be about the dumbest show I've ever watched. Reliability and quality does not even enter into their equation - they only review the vehicle's performance on the day they had it. Then good 'ole Jim says "till next time" then burns some rubber as he leaves the camera's view. Yeah, that's going to really influence my decision.

Again, there is a recurring trend with these arguments. The Big 3 keep trying to argue their vehicles are AS reliable as Toyota. When people talk about reliability, they always compare to Toyota, which sets the standard. Toyota guys never argue their vehicles are as reliable as a Chevy or Ford. Why is that?

Toyota is NOTED for quality - the others advertise it (Ford's is Quality is Job #1, Chevy's is The Longest Lasting...you know the rest).

Once again, even some of the Chevy die-hards admitted the 1999 Sierras/Silverados were junk. They had horrible reviews. Read Edmunds'. Again, when was the last time ANY Toyota got such a scathing review? And I'm sure there are other Chevys out there with reviews like the 99 Sierra/Silverado.

There is plenty of evidence out there that proves Toyota makes a higher quality, more reliable product. When the Big 3 boys are confronted with this, they always say "well my truck has 7K miles..." Whatever.

teo

Plutonious: Y cual es su punto? Chevy es el mejor!!!!

tbunder

you never told me who gm's competition is that has a 5.3. uh..........

so when you're towing or hauling something in your tundra and the rear bumper is throwing up sparks because of the trucks inability to stand up to the task of hauling heavy weight or towing a 4 ton boat, are you still bragging about how reliable and quality made it is? or how about the recommendation to get helper springs if you want to tow a jet ski. dude..........its weak.

you also really have not commented on why toyota does not offer anything to compare to the 5.4 in power, nor the bigger chevy powerplant. why is that? cuz they'd have to take the engine straight from ivan stewarts race truck, thats why. maybe its cuz if they'd offer a more powerful engine, the truck may push 40 grand.

plutonious

Si no entiendes mi punto clave no estas leyendo lo que acabo de escribir. Todos los hechos en las revistas y competencias cubiertas por las revistas han ensenado que las cameonetas Toyota son las mejores. Tambien, los estudios hechos por Consumer Reports y JD Powers dicen que la qualidad encontrada con los productos de Toyota es mejor que la que fue encontrada con Chevrolet o Ford. Si no me crees, lealos!

Tbunder - give Toyota some time to come out with a bigger engine and truck. The Tundra is their first V8 truck.

lbthedog

No. Just as somebody else wrote, you can take all the magazine stuff and toss it in the garbage. Especially the Consumers Reports stuff. No matter how anybody tries to spin it, the Toyotas are different. They truly do not match the full size GM, Ford or DCX lines. They compare to the low end (as far as capability goes) but have nothing to match the high end brutes. They appear to be asembled well but flimsy at the same time.

ndahi12

"lol yeah the best consumer magazine if you hate domestics, there is biased in that magazine for shure, as there is in any magazine."

Please tell me why the magazine is biased? They do not take advertising dollars, so there is no commerical bias. They are supported by their readers and not a big corporation. So there is no corporate bias.

Their reliability findings are similar to the reliability findings of JD Power, so their findings are replicated by another commercial establishment.

So please tell me where the bias is?

You have got to stop making blanket statements without backing them up.

sc0rpi0

I think that reason why Toyota isnt offering the full range of engines yet is because this is a first generation fullsize pickup.
When you get into a new area of market, you don't go in full steam with all your range of products, you probe first. Give Toyota a year or two, 2003 is when the new Tacomas and Tundras are supposed to show up. Then we'll see what happens, Tundra very well might get a bigger engine. We know that Tacoma will get a 3.7L.

plutonious

Your opinion is easier tossed in the garbage than facts based on research by JD Powers and Consumer Reports.

I think I speak on behalf of a lot of Toyota people when I say I would have more respect for the high-end brutes you talk about if their quality wasn't light-years behind Toyota. There's just no excuse to be making knocking engines, bad brakes, interiors that fall apart etc. anymore. 50 years ago, maybe, but not now.

isellpotiac

sued CR for erroneous statements it made about the Samurai, this vehicle was a hot selling item until CR trashed it with unsubstantiated information. Suzuki touched up CR pretty good in court and won $$$$$$$$$. I never have sen a retractment from any automobile magazine when they give wrong info. I don't give much wieght to anything CR says.

quadrunner500

I think you would have more respect for high end brutes also, if you put on lights and a plow, winch, lift gate, PTO, tossed your rakes and shovels in back, jumped in it with 6 guys, and pulled a backhoe behind. How long do you think it would be before that thin, dented sheet metal started to rust, or the fabric fell apart, or that DOHC engine would last when Rosco tops up the crankcase with chainsaw oil?

boaz47

CR isn't done by car or truck people. The people that do the testing in those magazines wouldn't know a work truck from a box of bricks. They test toasters after all. You wouldn't take their word on the best horse to bet in a race or the best football team to win the super-bowl would you.?. Give us a break, when not working for CR they could work part time as security guards at airports. These aren't rocket scientists, well if they were they would work for Ford Aerospace or GM because they have sent things into outer space. Having one of their washing machine testers recommend a truck or a car to me doesn't fill me with awe at their knowledge. Do they work in construction? Do they get their hands dirty everyday, other than with ink or pencil lead? Have they ever run the Rubicon with a 4X4? They might recommend a Kia Sportage for my off road needs when I need a Hummer. Is it any sweat off their noses that I can't climb over a Volkswagen sized bolder? Not at all. They know their toaster works. They are in business to sell magazines and make a profit. They can't make a profit by hiring people from Cal-Tech. CR doesn't go out and hire race car drivers to test sports cars, they use in-house people and all they can give you is an opinion. And you can form an opinion all by yourself, because you are every bit as qualified as anyone from CR is when it comes to Work trucks. What? Some of you are saying, I don't even own a work truck! That's OK, most testers at CR don't own a work truck either. Maybe this is a touch of humor but to a great degree it is true. All CR and JD powers are is consultants and all consultants can do is make suggestions for you to try. If what the suggest doesn't work you have to live with it, not them. Don't get me wrong, they might give you a starting point to look at, but they have no idea how you are going to use a car or truck so how could they make an educated guess what Might be best for you?

boaz47

That last post was way off topic.

jcmdie

Toyota makes a fine product. That said, they have also made a lot of garbage. For years they were known for thier body wrinkles and bodies that rusted thru. Thier engines are fine except when they are blowing head gaskets. And lets not forget about all the problems they are currently having with brakes. Yes, over the years Chevy, Ford, and Dodge has had problems with all sorts of things, but so have the Toyota. I owned one and it was fine for what it was used for, but certainly not better than a Ranger or S-10

chevytruck_fan

its obvious that people that read consumer reports have a worse opinion of the Big 3 than non-readers, I've never met anyone that was a fan of the big 3 liking consumer reports, since consumer reports polls its own subscribers, those subscribers are going to have pre concieved notions about the vehicle. there is definantly a biased there.

boaz47

I agree. I had a Toyota truck and I have to admit it worked just fine. But I do remember the first three generations of Mini Van they made. Couldn't get it through their heads that an interference engine was designed to over heat on a Southern California freeway. And overheat they did. No complaints from the mags if I remember correctly but everyone I knew complained. I would have no problem buying another Toyota if it met my needs and I could get then best price. I can remember looking at CR and even Edmunds on getting a full sized SUV. They had nothing good to say about Ford, Chevy, or Dodge. From 1989 to 2001 I had a Dodge Ram Charger 318 auto. I replaced one Alternator and one U-joint in all that time. And I used to 4X4 a few times a year. Why did I get a Dodge? Because at that time only the domestics made a full sized SUV. Would a Toyota 4-Runner or Nissan Pathfinder have met my needs? With a 4000 pound sail boat? Not a chance.

hutch7

As a domestic pick-up driver for the last 20 years I switched to a Tundra last month. I traded a '97 F-150 XLT. The Ford was a good truck, but after numerous recalls and various other troubles
I had had enough. Honestly, if I was a using my truck to haul large loads and working it real hard
I'd have stuck with a domestic. But as a commuter and boat/ATV hauler the Tundra is great. I also enjoy driving the Tundra around town much more than I did my Ford. The back seat is smaller, but my kid's say they like it better...smoother ride.
Just my .02.

chevytruck_fan

they may not enjoye it when they reach their teens lol

hutch7

Yeah, but at least the truck will still be running!

chevytruck_fan

thats a funny comment considering chevy's are the longest lasting trucks on the road

52farminchevy

Ya cant be comparin them limited ones too them big3 ones now. Them forien ones is for folks who be trendy, and is lookin for them car like ways in em. That workin man needs a big3 one for workin, thats all. They aint interested in no shiny forien one thats goin break first time ya haul with it now. Course them ones who is chasin after that trend aint goin work em none no how, so they just dont be gettin it now. Them fancy tells in them magazines is for them folks who is lookin for that trendy forien one to begin with. But that workin man dont be needin no magazine tell, he got that knowin of which ones is made for workin. Look too them option sheets on them trucks now, that truth is there for all who is seekin it, thats for sure! Good luck on this one now!