Howdy, Stranger!

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





Howdy, Stranger!

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

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Consumer Reports praises Toyota Tundra

devil1devil1 Posts: 74
edited March 2014 in Toyota
I just picked up a copy of Consumer Reports today
and looked to see if they showed the reliability of
the Tundra as per the first model year. I was a
little skeptical because of some of the problems I
have heard, but it got an "Above Average" rating
(Half red circle) for reliability! Not only that,
but it got Consumer Reports TOP pick for full size
pickups!!

This is how the reliability index went for full
size pickups:

Ford F-150: Average
Chevy Silverado: Well Below Average
Dodge Ram: Well Below Average
Toyota Tundra: Above Average

Well once again Toyota out does the competition!
Oh and they said the Chevy's reliability has been
very poor for this new model year. Now I am very
confident in the Tundra's reliability. People will
always have problems with any vehicle, but on a
percentage basis it is now proven that the Tundra
will have a better reliability factor than the
Big3. Sorry fellas.
«1345

Comments

  • quadrunner500quadrunner500 Posts: 2,728
    No need to get overconfident, or apologize. Just go to topic #1060 before writing your rebuttal. Maybe Consumers Reports doesn't check for oil pressure, or metal shavings?
  • barlitzbarlitz Posts: 752
    How can consumers even say that the tundra hasn't even been out for a year yet.F150's been around for many years so hasn't the dodge and chevy.I wouldn't read to much into that article they are comparing almost a million and a half trucks (big3)combined to 100,000 tundras,thats almost a 15 to 1 ratio.Be real.
  • kit1404kit1404 Posts: 128
    Consumer's Reports does not like trucks/SUV's or anything close to a vehicle that is truck-based. They like the Tundra for its smooth Lexus engine/drivetrain. Curious to me is how they ignore the gas mileage - the Tundra does no better than the bigger and much more comfortable Ford and GM trucks. Don't get me wrong - I consider them a source for vehicle info and have had a subscription for about 20 years. But, you must read them all the time and understand the bias. (By the way, good luck interpretting their latest reliability ratings - they generally do not interpret at first glance, you must refer to a scale at the beginning of the ratings.)
  • Another literal Consumer Report believer!

    Guess we all have to have a good laugh now and then. I don't believe anything those magazine reports state. Motor Trend gave the Silverado Truck of the Year in 99. Now Consumer Reports rates it "below average" in 00. I don't think so. Everyone knows that the newest models and designs are always pushed and advertized as the best and all the others get terrible ratings.

    But, there are people all over the world that will believe it as gospel. What Chuckleheads.
  • ferris47ferris47 Posts: 131
    I love my Tundra, and have had no problems whatsoever but the fact remains that it is a brand new truck. I would be willing to bet that initial quality is better and I would surmise a guess that overall quality will be better but there is really no way of knowing that until at least a couple of years.

    Does CR make a statment like they are talking about inital quality? Just curious. They would have to be making the same educated guess that I made when I bought the truck. I did read an article, though, where Ivan Stuart was given a pre-production Tundra and told to "Go break it" and all he could do was screw up one of the access doors and get it really really dirty. That was selling point to me.

    If you go with the Tundra I think you will be happy, but take the CR article with a grain of salt on long term reliability. It still remains to be seen, although I truely believe it will last longer and better then the others.
  • jaijayjaijay Posts: 162
    I guess Ivan Stewart or Consumer Reports have ever changed the oil in one of those Tundras.
  • RoclesRocles Posts: 985
    I'll stick with Fords. They seem to get the least press crap--pro and con---must be those ugly front ends, eh?

    In all seriousness, don't ever buy what a moto-journalist spews from their pseudo-intelligence in the subject. Most of these guys are rejects from good magazines and either settled for the paycheck or came into the buisness with some form of bias for a manufactuer in one way or another.
    I take motorcycle mags as a comparison. Most of these clowns either dream of yesterday Brit icons (BSA, Enfield or Norton) or rave about a rare and expensive bike like Aprilia. They mutter about the big four from Japan and always dismiss HD and gloss over BMWs. Why? Because they aren't "exotic" to talk about. Why don't they bring up the old Triumphs? Too common--everyone had one. HD? Too much image--good and bad.
    Truck and car mags are no different. They always rave about teh new and throw out the common or older models despite the stats.
  • jcmdiejcmdie Posts: 595
    What percentage of Tundra trucks do think are purchased as work trucks as opposed to domestic trucks? I have not seen or heard of any fleet users that have bought the Tundra. There may be a few independant workers with them but I think that you will find that almost all of the Tundras bought are family cars. That is thier market. Nothing wrong with that but it is not fair to compare a truck used to go to Home Depot once a month with trucks that are used for hauling and towing daily.

    In addition to that, realize that there hasn't been a Honda or Toyota that Consumer Reports didn't like. You would have to look real hard to find any Dodge or Chevy that they do like. There is good information in that magazine but only if taken with a grain of salt.
  • devil1devil1 Posts: 74
    You make an intelligent case (unlike some other people). That would work in the equation, but not to the extent to change the whole outcome (Maybe Ford, they have a big market of Fleet trucks and such). Dodge and Chevy don't nearly have as much share though.

    In reference to your second question, I used to own a Tacoma and they ripped it to shreds in Consumer Reports. I was very disappointed after reading it. Although in reliability it did fine, but they hated the truck. I, on the other hand, loved my Taco.

    Again, I am debating between the F-150 and Tundra. Chevy and Dodge are not in my consideration due mainly to looks and info I find.

    I right now own a 97 Eclipse that consumer reports ripped to pieces on reliability, and it HAS been very unreliable. Nothing too major but it has been in shop probably 6 or 7 times in 3 years. (Not too good)
  • RoclesRocles Posts: 985
    ouch! I felt that one from here!
  • tundradudetundradude Posts: 588
    What percentage of Tundra trucks do think are
    purchased as work trucks as opposed to domestic
    trucks?

    You would be surprised! My county bought 18 of them.
  • barlitzbarlitz Posts: 752
    I am mortified, stupified and horrified to read that my tax dollars are being spent on foreign trucks.
  • tundradudetundradude Posts: 588
    Actually that was my tax dollars in this case.
  • rwellbaum2rwellbaum2 Posts: 1,006
    Love your post. Quote..."I am...stupified" ;)
  • barlitzbarlitz Posts: 752
    In all honesty is that a goverment agency that purchased those trucks.I didn't think they could do that.I can't imagine the Presidents motorcade being protected by 4Runners.It would be an injustice to the American people to spend there money (tax dollars) to support another Country.Out of curiosity are you from the State of Indiana maybe there is some kind of deal with the Toyota maufacturing plant that is there.
  • arkie6arkie6 Posts: 198
    So, do you think it's ok to spend government money (our tax dollars) on pork barrel make work projects like the Big Dig?

    Regarding supporting a foreign country with tax dollars, I can buy stock in Toyota Motors Co. just like you or any other red blooded American. I can also buy stock in GM just like the Japanese can. So what is a foreign company? Is it just a matter of where the headquarters are located or where the owners (stockholders) are located? Both GM and Toyota are "World" companies. The lines between "us" and "them" are now pretty grey. It's a global economy.

    Again, is the Tundra that's made in Indiana "foreign" or is the Ford that's made in Canada "American"? So, if a government agency purchases a Ford made in Canada or a Chevy made in Mexico, are they supporting a foreign country with our tax dollars?

    Why are we even haggling over this?
  • tundradudetundradude Posts: 588
    north carolina
  • tundradudetundradude Posts: 588
    One day you need to look and see what automobile companies owns who and what percentage and include the European makes not just the Japanese. I have seen so many people that have a problem with the Japanese and will proudly own or dismiss a German make. What you will see will surprise you. For example, did you know GM owns a part of Subaru?

    GM is the biggest company in the world. They make more money than the continent of Africa. Even though they are losing market share incrementally especially to Ford, they are so dominant, they own more than you think they do. Just think; after GM and Toyota had their joint venture in Freemont; GM used what they learned to better their operations in all their factories and their consumers benefited as well.

    You need to look at the whole picture(globally) and just not what you may see on some commerical on TV or some billboard on a trip to work someday.

    The most scariest thing that has happened in the auto industry is not that government is buying toyotas, mazdas, or whatever. It is that Mercedes has bought out Chrysler. Plymouth will soon be dead. How many jobs will be lost for that reason?

    Enough of my babbling!
  • barlitzbarlitz Posts: 752
    There is a site called www.bigdig that is updated daily with photos and info on whats going on.I don't know if you've ever been to Boston.But there is a highway that goes right through the city.They are taking that highway adding lanes to it and putting it underground.There are sections of it that come within feet of underground train lines built many years ago.Also if you do go to look at pics you might see a picture of me keying a Tundra (just kidding).GM is the #1 followed by Ford and then Toyota as far as world companies.I guess we look at things differently and in the end it probably doesn't matter to any one.
  • All the Toyota cars look the same and the Toyota trucks are just smaller or bigger versions of the same truck. No originality whatsoever. Pretty blah to buy cars and trucks with zero personality of their own.
  • who makes it or if it is American or Non-American. The Tundra costs too much for much less truck and has no personality. Ugly, ugly, ugly. Looks somewhat like a slightly bigger version of it's Tacoma predecessor! The Tacoma is at least decent looking.
  • quadrunner500quadrunner500 Posts: 2,728
    Pewter Z71
    and
    Coors Light

    .....just not at the same time
  • rwellbaum2rwellbaum2 Posts: 1,006
    I'm glad to see that bud lite dud had the decency to leave this post after his fraudulent war hero claims were exposed as lies. BLD, if your lurking about reading this, thank you for doing the only honorable thing you could have and disappeared from this topic. I'm no war hero, but I've been in combat and shot at. There's a couple of other guys here that can say the same. We'll let you fib about alot of things that are not important, but not about serving your country in wartime.
  • barlitzbarlitz Posts: 752
    I'm ashamed with people like you fighting for our country.
  • RoclesRocles Posts: 985
    What happened to posts 38-39?

    rwellbaum,
    What did Bud say?
  • rwellbaum2rwellbaum2 Posts: 1,006
    Bud light dud claimed to have fought a war for america, but was exposed as a liar. After his lies were revealed, he deleted the incriminating posts. I happen to be in the military and have been in combat. I don't mind giving each other a bad time about our truck preferences, I don't mind BLD acting like a fool, but I just won't tolerate him lying about being a war hero when he has never been in a war.
  • rwellbaum2rwellbaum2 Posts: 1,006
    You should be ashamed! While I'm putting my life on the line to keep that oil coming, your bad-mouthing my choice of vehicles.
  • quadrunner500quadrunner500 Posts: 2,728
    I purchased the Consumer Reports Sport Utility Special 2000. I must admit, the mag has added quite a bit of splash and color since those days of 30 years ago when I read it in the school library. While they may not accept advertising, that hasn't kept them from hawking their own used car pricing service, auto insurance pricing service, etc prominently on the magazine pages. In this regard, they have to sell to keep the presses rolling, just like the mighty Petersen Publishing empire, no different.

    In the section on reliability forecasts, they state: "We give results only for models for which there were sufficient survey responses to make a judgement. So you won't find all-new or recently redesigned models listed here. The zero line in each graph is the average trouble rate for all 1997 to 1999 vehicles."

    I note that in the reliability history for Tundra trouble spots, "NO DATA NEW MODEL" is the wording used. But unlike for all other vehicles for which data is not available, this aspect did not restrain the editors from making a reliability prediction of "better than average" anyway. Bias?

    I found it ironic also, that Tundra was praised for being "relatively frugal" on fuel, yet according to EPA figures for city and highway, the class leaders are GMC Sierra and Chevy Silverado. But if you dismiss this as part of the same EPA conspiracy allegedly responsible for denying the Tundra Limited models a factory receiver hitch consider the following:

    Trucks are not directly compared to each other in Consumer Reports. Rather, they are compared to each other indirectly, by how well each are able to fare against all cars, minivans, trucks, suvs tested from 1997 to 1999, as a group.

    The flaw in this, is the natural bias towards the center. A truck that is more car like gets better scores. And as trucks and suvs gather a larger percentage of total vehicle sales, scores for all trucks and suvs improve for this reason alone, even if there are no improvements in reliability. Put another way, if you adjust the floor height, we can all be 6 feet tall.
  • rwellbaum2rwellbaum2 Posts: 1,006
    I find it hard to believe that if money played a part in consumer reports, they'd still have the Tundra as their top pick. Ford easily makes 10 times more money off the f-150 and could easily "buy-off" the editors of CR, if that were the case. The simple fact is that they liked it better. Motor trend also picked the Tundra as their top truck, along with 4x4&off-road magazine. If it makes you feel any better, the writers at "truckin" magazine didn't like the Tundra that much. Especially because there's not a lot of aftermarket "lowering" parts for it yet. ;)
  • quadrunner500quadrunner500 Posts: 2,728
    Agree, the editors like the Tundra better. The buying public on the other hand, doesn't seem to be headed that way.
This discussion has been closed.