Full-size pickup sales - F-150 best selling truck, but for how much longer?



  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102
    I KNOW a domestic fan isn't commenting on quality.

    You "know" nothing Doc. You simply have an opinion, which is biased and flawed.

    How do I define quality?
    1. 25+ years of driving GM's with ZERO major issues or breakdowns. Many vehicles driven well over 100K miles, some 200K+.
    2. Compare the build quality between the new Tundra and the GMT900's sometime. Look at the interior materials used and the finish (Even Fisher Price doesn't paint their plastic parts). Look at sheet metal gauge used, panel gaps, frame design/construction.

    Quality does NOT mean throwing a high HP, fancy DOHC engine with questionable camshafts and a fancy problematic 6 spd tranny into a cheaply built, riveted together truck and proclaiming superiority because it's "fast". Not gonna fly in this market, sorry.

    This is my opinion, beleive what you want, and I'll beleive what I want and in time (not 1st year sales of first offering), we'll see how many buyers agree with me and how many agree with you.
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    Yeah, Spyder!

    Can we at least watch them flaunt their 2nd-rate image before you bash them for it?

    What's that all about? :confuse:

  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102
    You mean like Tundra's 2nd rate image in the NHTSA tests and the new CR report? :lemon:
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    Compare the build quality between the new Tundra and the GMT900's sometime. Look at the interior materials used and the finish (Even Fisher Price doesn't paint their plastic parts). Look at sheet metal gauge used, panel gaps, frame design/construction.

    I have that work sub-contracted out. I have people.


    http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cu-press-room/pressroom/archive/2004/07/eng04- 07car.htm?resultPageIndex=1&resultIndex=6&searchTerm=toyota+tundra

    They're pretty good at it. :blush:

    I sleep very, very well.

  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102
    Ahh, I see, basing opinions of a brand new completely redesigned 2007 Tundra on 2004 CR article. That makes sense!!! What's the matter, the new CR reports aren't in your favor? LOL
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    What's the matter, the new CR reports aren't in your favor?

    Actually, they are!

    http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/past-road-test/full-sized-pickups-9-07/o- - verview/0709_car_ov.htm

    It is lonely at the top. :blush:

  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Ya know what's even more ironic....the source for that comment is the 'Scourge of Detroit', 'the most unethical and biased group on the planet', 'the rag that Toyota has in its back pocket'.....

    CONSUMER REPORTS !!!!!!!!!!

    The world has turned upside down. Gotta love it.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Spyder, speaking of "accuracy", the IIHS link you provided shows the "Classic" GMT800's, not the GMT900's. Might want to read more carefully, or less selectively.

    No Kidding !!!!

    Why do you think I put that link there with that title? Helllooo.

    Do you catch the significance? Hmmmm. Ok let me help you. GM has not yet allowed the IIHS to test the new GMT900s. There are no ratings for it yet!!!!!!

    So as I noted when Mr/Mrs Shopper go looking at safety ratings they see the GM trucks on the bottom of the rankins possibly not seeing the distinction that the rating is for the old fashioned, and highly unsafe, 'Classic'.

    This is why I preferenced the link by saying that GMs Marketing has fallen on its collective face by allowing the Silvy and Sierra to remain on the bottom of the list for 13 months now!!!!

    In addition to 'accuracy' you need to read between the lines. Now why would GM not allow the IIHS to test the new GMT900s. Are they afraid of something? Hmmmmm, 13 months on the market and nothing yet.
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    You can almost see the sweat form GM execs.

    Tundra has kicked their tail up and down the block, causing plant closings.

    Ford and GM haven't even reloaded yet.

    Pretty soon, -2% might be a great year?

    You sure the Steinbrenners don't own GM? :surprise:

  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208

    I have seen the reference to painted interior plastic parts on the Tundra now several times. Are you sure about that? I also note that it hasn't been refuted by the Tundra fans, so maybe it's true. I dunno. I looked at the Tundra, and sat in it, and hated the cheesy appearance which is one of several reasons they couldn't sell one to me, even though I owned a Toyota pickup at the time. In fact my 2 previous pickups were Toyotas. But PAINTED PLASTIC?!?!?!? That alone will help kill sales. My 85 and 92 Toyota pickups had pretty decent interiors, and no painted plastic. Out of curiosity, what color is the plastic underneath the paint? What if it's lead-based chinese paint? Would you allow a little kid inside who might rub the paint and lick his hands afterward? Yikes! Sales killer! Sales killer!

  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102
    Where in that link did it say it favored the Tundra in any way? I did see this though:

    But it lost some refinement and livability in the redesign.
  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102

    Yes, and there is no disputing it. The Tundra's dashboard and interior panels are painted. They are gray plastic underneath. Here is a link to one of several threads about it over at TS:

    http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/110309-has-this-happened-to-your-da- - - sh/

    The entire dash is painted, and folks have been having issues with scratches in the paint exposing the gray underneath. You're not the only one! I'm resigned to cheap plastic interiors. But a painted dash? Dumb, IMO.
  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102
    Tundra has kicked their tail up and down the block, causing plant closings.

    Yeah, Tundra caused them...LOL Toyota sells maybe 50K more Tundras than in the past and GM, who sells nearly a million/year has to close plants because of it. hahahahahha Your funny!!!!
  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102

    I have no idea why the GMT900's have not been tested by the IIHS yet, but I would bet it isn't because they are "scared". They did score 5 of 5 stars in the NHTSA tests, they have no reason to be scared, they are just as safe as any other truck out there, including the Tundra. Actually, safer than Tundra according to the NHTSA tests. There are not too many truck buyers who buy based on front crash tests alone anyway, and I am guessing 99.9% of new truck buyers know the difference between a "Classic" GMT800 and a NBS GMT900. I bet that didn't affect sales by even ONE.
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    Man I just can't believe they would use a painted dash. I mean with technology today it wouldn't cost much more to impregnate the plastic with the color.

    I have a recently bought used ranger that I really dislike so I'll take a trip down to the Toyota dealership and see first hand on that dash. I wonder if they would mind if I ran a fingernail across the dash to test the paint? If is scratches maybe they'll give me a better deal on a trade with the Ranger. :P
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Probably not but it is weird that GM is letting the Silvy and Sierra sit all alone at the bottom...and we sell Chevy's too. I'm sure that the GMT900s are every bit as safe as any of the others but why let it sit at the bottom of the list?

    I'm not sure at all that it didn't affect sales at all because what noone can see is lost opportunities. If the research done at home or at work where one or the other decision makers discovers the IIHS rankings and BLAM...the GMs are excluded from consideration from the outset. It might be a former F150 owner, who might have worked at the closed Norfolk Assembly plant and is POd at Ford, who is now looking to unload the previous Ford and finds the GMs at the bottom of the IIHS list. 'Well lets look at that new Tundra that's all over the TV.' Lost opportunity.
  • 12ozcurls12ozcurls Member Posts: 65
    hahaahahahha...you toyota guys are so funny...i suppose this is ur idea of quality then huh drfill?

    http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/114436-tundra-tailate-failures-i-am- -club/
  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    I can't believe it either. It costs LESS to put the color into the plastic, because it saves a step in the process. Painting the interior plastic parts, regardless of how stupid that sounds, actually increases the labor cost, at least it seems logical to think so.

    Some nimwit marketing guy at Toyota probably came up with that idea. "It's not a bug, it's a feature! Let's advertise that the Tundra dash and door panels are the only painted plastic interior parts in the entire automobile industry! That'll increase our sales fer sure!" I can't think of ANY earthly reason Toyota would do that, unless...

    It is somehow cheaper. Toyota has been resting on its laurels now, riding the "quality" rumor train just like the Big 3 did for so many years. The Consumer Reports article alludes to that. Their sales have been good and, like ALL companies that expereince rapid growth and big profits, Toyota now suffers from hubris. They think they can cut corners and the stupid public won't see it. Sales will just increase forever and ever. Cheap painted interiors, cheesy weak frames, floppy beds, thin sheet metal. Make it flashy and fast and it'll sell. It doesn't work that way and Toyota is going to find that out the hard way. I found that out, with my Toyotas, and didn't go back this time around. They had a very loyal customer and lost me. They are going to have to increase Tundra quality a WHOLE BUNCH before I return to Toyota.

    Speaking of which. I was at a stoplight today next to a brand new Tundra, didn't even have plates yet. The orange peel in the paint was HORRIBLE. I can do a better paint job blindfolded with a broom. Strange, since other Tundras I have seen had very good quality paint jobs. This tells me they are rushing them out the door without good inspection/QA/QC.

  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    Yikes! That's RIDICULOUS!!! The tailgate should be able to hold ANY reasonable load, including ATVs. Hunters live and breath ATVs. Can't imagine anyone who hunts buying one to haul his ATV.

    Those tailgate seams are GLUED or PUTTIED together! The sheet metal is JUNK! My Silverado has the optional EZLift feature, but it's a heavy sucker and closes with authority.

    I haven't heard that before, nice post 12oz. This will help that quality rumor and increase sales for sure....

    What can Toyota do about that? They're all like that, so they can't recall them.

    Gad, every time I see that stuff I'm so glad I didn't drop 40 large on a Tundra. The Silverado ain't perfect, I have some complaints, but they're mice nuts compared to Tundra issues.

  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    Just back from the Toyota dealership. Looked at a black Crewmax but didn't test drive. The texture on the dash resembles a sprayin bedliner for some reason. Didn't bother scratching it. And I would agree the orange peel especially on black is disturbing reminding me of GM and their paint problems in the 80's.

    The salesman did mention they have huge discounts + rebates on all of the new Tundras with the 4.7 as no one seems to be interested in them at a $1000 difference from the 5.7.

    Interesting enough he had no clue on CR's recent report giving their 4WD model Tundra an "unreliable" rating as well as the V6 Camry. He said the Camry was Motor Trends Car of the Year to which I said Motor Trend doesn't check for reliablilty and if they did well what could you say? On the door next to the sticker it does have the NHTSA crash rating of four stars for driver and passenger and 3 stars for rollover.

    When leaving I told him to give me his card and if I buy a Tundra I'll be sure to buy it from him.

    Man that post by 12oz sure is disturbing about the weight that the tailgates could or should I say can't support.
  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102
    This thread at TS is 5 pages long, but read posts #65 and #69. So much for "Yeah, but Toyota takes care of it's customers".

    http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/113646-transmission-fault-identifie- - - - - d-5/

    Yep, now this is a "quality" truck, huh Doc?

    We'll see how their sales figures look after people pull their heads out of the sand and see this stuff.


    The "Quality" paint jobs aren't going to help maintain sales growth either.

    http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/114504-poor-paint-quality-new-2007-- - - tundra/

    With this kind of "Quality" (or lack thereof), Toyota isn't going to be catching anyone in sales numbers. :lemon:
  • kgfordkgford Member Posts: 7
    Dr Fill,Often imitated. Never duplicated.

    You try, and that's what's important. Don't ever forget it.


    Your expression perfectly describes Ford F-series trucks. It takes me less than 3 minutes to explain why ford is and has been the truck leader for over 30 years and they never set foot on a toyota lot again when looking for a real truck. And a real fully boxed and thru welded crossmember frame can hold over 3,000 lbs compared to your toyotas under 2,10 lbs. :P
  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102
    So Doc and Spyder,

    It seems not all of your Ford to Toyota converts are all too happy with their decision. How will this affect sales conquests in the future as more and more people see the "real" Tundra?

    http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/114504-poor-paint-quality-new-2007-- tundra/ See Post #8:

    "Ultra thin paint on all these things. If you look at it funny it will leave a scratch down to the primer. Worst paint job on any new vehicle I have ever owned.

    Between the bad paint, painted dash, cheap plastics, collapsing tailgates, spongy soft bed, etc...and not counting for the real problems people are having with these things...I am official selling mine. I've spent 3 weekends installing amps, speakers, nav, etc. and unless somebody wants to pay for it I will be taking it out. Only good news is that it comes out in 1/10 the time it went in.

    I have owned Ford trucks in the past and never had the issues with them I've had with this Junkra. I admit I like the look and power...but I want a truck I can use and not have to worry about. I never worried about my Ford truck.

    Whenever Toyota gets the kinks worked out I may be back. But then again I may not since I will be losing money on this POS.

    PS you can check my prior posts if you think I'm trolling. I own this thing and I'm really just sick of worrying about it. I want a truck that will give me piece of mind and the new Tundra is not it.

    Toyota is human too I guess."
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJMember Posts: 3,516
    Pointing out posts on other sites has nothing to do with sales... don't be the one that gets this discussion closed down too.

    kcram - Pickups Host
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    that the Tundra sales will have absolutely no impact whether the Ford F150 retains its position or not. Some Toyota zealots tend to believe that it will but are seriously kidding themselves.
  • blckislandguyblckislandguy Member Posts: 1,150
    Dear K-spyder,


    I'd love to have you though address my two major points.

    1) How does the extra "step" in their distribution system add any value to the consumer? Seems to me that it doesn't take a Harvard MBA to realize that this extra layer of overhead simply adds cost. Monopolies never benefit anyone except the monopolists. Isn't the France family of NASCAR fame the Southeast "distributor"?

    2) Rather than having quasi-monopolistic "distributors" configure the vehicles for their areas, I'd feel a lot better if individual consumers, real live consumers, could pick and choose what they options they wanted to buy. I realize that this is bottoms-up approach is alien to the Japanese cultural system but it seems to work well here. You might find for example that a lot of NYC customers have second homes up in the Adirondacks or Catskills. Or maybe out on the Islands (Fishers, Block Island, Nantucket, etc.) and would rather order, buy and have their 4X4 Tundra serviced at their home dealer in NYC than at a dealer in upstate NY or in RI.

    How Toyota decides to do business is, of course, their business. But for American truck buyers who are used to an open spec book (I think you can even get leather as an option on the Chevy 1500 Work Truck!) and direct factory to dealer pricing, this may not be the best approach.
  • h20h20 Member Posts: 42
    Had someone tell me the other day that they did not like anything at all about toyota tundra or (toadra) yet they bought one? go figure. Don't believe everything you here on the internet. What a shame.Do reaserch consider your options and make your best choice. btw I have never bought anything because someone else or most people were buying it. Its the sheep following the sheep. h20
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    It's the same in every manufacturing concern. There is a production group and a sales/marketing group. when you buy a truck from Ford or GM you don't actually buy it from the 'factory' and the money go to the producing site. There is a sales and marketing group at every manufacturer. That's who the dealer pays. To us it doesn't matter we pay the dealer.

    Point #1
    As to efficiency well here the numbers speak for themselves. Jim Press set up this system and ran it for 30 yrs and Toyota's sales and marketing exploded across N America. Now that's a model that works. There is no monolithic HQ in Dearborn or Renaissance or Auburn Hills that decides everything...each local region does the deciding.

    Point #2
    Well this point has been debated on evey product thread here and elsewhere. Toyota and Honda both limit the configurations in order to improve production efficiency. Note that Toyota here is only interested this year in selling to the retail buyer in a relatively few configurations. By doing this they keep the costs down and the profits up. More volume in smaller segments.

    In the end this is just business..maximize sales revenue and minimize costs. This is what Toyota does better than any of the rest. All the rest ( like the discussions here ) are fanboi hoohaa.
  • blckislandguyblckislandguy Member Posts: 1,150
    OK, points well taken.
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    So spyder what have you to say regarding how Toyota dumped Press after 37 years of service and bringing Toyota to the no. 1 spot? Last I heard he's heading over to Chrysler.

    Need I mention that Toyota marketing guru who made Scion a household name for the young that's moving over to Ford.

    I'm sure Toyota errr Toyoda is real happy about that.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Well Press is over 60 and he had been 'kicked' upstairs to a board position at Toyora Corporate. Then there may have been other 'issues' that were never mentioned in his taking mega bundles of cash from Chrysler LLC. My guess is that cold hard cash and the desire to stay in the day-to-day were the biggest factors in his decision to move.

    In the end it's only business, nothing more.

    Farley, $20 Million? See previous statement. Toyota execs are notoriously underpaid by industry standards. Ditto the dealerships, sales force, staff, you name it. How well off can a sales person be when selling Scions bring a total markup of $800, at full sticker, or when the two highest volume vehicles ( Corolla and Camry ) bring ZERO to $500 on average.

    Toyota's whole marketing scheme is based on volume, volume, volume while keeping the cost components low. Their perfect model of efficiency in selling are the internet groups in CA. There are mega-stores there that are the largest retailers on the planet with sales people that average 60+ units monthly ( that's 3 sales per working day on average )...everyone of them a giveaway. The industry average for monthly sales per person is eight!!.
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    told me that they were in the top 5% in the nation moving over 500 vehicles a month. And they don't do live music or hotdogs on the weekends ;)

    Only business? I'd be concerned if a guy that built your USA operations from the ground up left and went to a competitor.
  • blckislandguyblckislandguy Member Posts: 1,150
    Khspdyer, lets leave Jim Press' reputation to one side and without any further blemishes. You are a given to hyperbole. No successful car sales person, or really any successful professional, works just 20 days a month.

    Sure, maybe the Toyota business model is "volume, volume, volume,.." but even at zero GPM on a retail sale this doesn't mean that no one is making any money on the sale. The F & I Department is probably good for $2000-$3000 per unit, the used car department loves the trade-ins, the sales guy pumping our 60 units a month has to be making a 100K+ a year or else the local BMW store would send a cab over for him, etc.

    Here in the Northeast, the domestic brands are reduced to quoting everything at dealer invoice. Literally. This doesn't mean though that the dealer-principal is losing any money. Au contraire, he is quite willing to have the public thinks that he is giving the vehicle away at "cost" when he has multiple shots at the consumer before they finally drive off in his new car. (The automobile industry reminds me of the airline industry: everyone makes money, bundles of money, except the airlines.)

    Finally, with regard to "volume, volume, volume" , as Toyota pushes the volume envelope their dealership CSI's are approximating that of the big, bad GM and Ford stores. (Source? Cover article in Baron's in August of 06). This will in the end come back to bite them. Just as the decreassing reliability ratings will.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    I didn't say anything other than 'issues.'

    Nonetheless there are typically 30 days in a month with two days off per week that's 22 working days sometimes 23. I did use 20 days as a round number. Yes if a sales person is doing 40+ retail units a month he should be able to clear $150K+. But that is not Toyota's model. They would have all the new cars sold over the internet where instead of one salesperson doing 40+ monthly 'at retail' there are 5 or 6 doing 60 monthly at invoice.

    You may be familiar with Longo Toyota ( or not since you're in the NE ). They are the largest auto retailer on the planet doing 2000-2500 new units monthly. A large number of these are done as internet sales at the rate of 3 per person per day; i.e. 60-70 per month. That's the model being held up to the rest of the nation. Instead of being lot rats be the LLBean of auto sales. How much commission do you think 65 sales of Zero GPM generate? They're all flats.

    To Toyota it doesnt matter what the final selling price is. They've been paid 'full sticker' when they shipped the vehicle. If one store sells 300 units struggling to retail them on the lot, and succeeds, with an average of $800 GPM but another sells 1000 units and gives all of them away at $0 GPM, which then is more valuable to the manufacturer?

    You are way way way way off on the F&I numbers. Due to a lot of outside issues the average 'goal' per copy is $1000. But that's rarely reached. Among the reasons are, a huge number of buyers are financed through their credit union; til recently many buyers used their House/ATM; or some were just wealthy enough with equity enough in the paid off trade to pay cash for the difference. A lot of long term Toyota owners paid off their first one 10-20 yrs ago and have been rolling that equity forward ever since.

    The Scions are Toyota's experiment with a new way of doing business. No markup, no price discussion, no pressure, killer prices, buy what you want when you want. The sales people are there just to write up the order...or not if it's done over the internet.

    Toyota and Honda have been and are still struggling to get CSI numbers up to Buick levels. This has not changed at all from the 90's except that now, at least in Toyota's system, they are taking money away from the salesperson, the managers and the stores as a whole if they don't hit the national averages.
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    Please, Toyota is boring to talk about.

  • blckislandguyblckislandguy Member Posts: 1,150
    Kdhspyder, what you descibe so well is happening in many industries. In fact "The Economist" calls it "disintermediation". A lot of sucessful people like stock brokers, insurance reps, local book store owners, local newspaper publishers, etc. used to make a decent middle class living until the internet came along. Thats all of course changed. In the automotive industry, not only are the sales guys downwardly mobile, the dealers are also. The factories cut margins to gain control over the sales process. I think tht the GPM on a new Mercedes is 6%. There isn't a heck of a lot a dealer can discount if he begins with only 6 points. He certainly can't discount them enough to sell cars nationwide. The former MB dealer in ME (there is only one for the whole state) complained to me one time that he couldn't make any money with the line because no one in good old Maine believed in leasing and that was the only place to make any money on a new MB sale.
  • bugchuckerbugchucker Member Posts: 118
    Toyota, the ONLY truck with the top rating for front and rear crashes. Tell GM & Ford to stick that in their pipe!
  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102
    "Toyota, the ONLY truck with the top rating for front and rear crashes. Tell GM & Ford to stick that in their pipe! "

    They are NOT the only one with top ratings in front crash test ratings, in fact, they are only "as good" as the others in IIHS and WORSE than everyone else in the NHTSA tests. As for the rear crash tests? Maybe, but if they are it's most likely due to the rear frame, bed and tailgate being one big "Crumple Zone"... :P
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Whatever the interpretation, until the other 5 come up with an improvement in the rear crash criteria ( seat and head restraint dynamics ) the Tundra will remain tops in the list in the more difficult tests.

    Since Ford has already 'aced' the tests with the Taurus/Sable they know how to get the top marks so I'd expect the new F150 next year to also be on top. Dodge? What's up with GM though? How long will it sit on the bottom due to the poor 'Classic' rating?
  • anythingbuttoyanythingbuttoy Member Posts: 102

    Do you think good rear crash test ratings will offset the negative perception of the Tundra that is getting worse by the day? How do you think the latest Quality Issue will affect sales for the remaining 2007's and 2008's? I am assuming you do know about the Tailgate issue, right?

    http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/22/toyota-tundra-hit-with-two-more-quality-issue- s/

    So, in less than a year into it's first year, the Tundra has had the following issues:
    1. Camshaft issue, resolved but number of remaining potentially affected camshafts still out there is still unknown.
    2. Tranny Issue (Rumble Strip). Seems to be the Torque Converter. Now Toyota is no longer replacing entire tranny, just the TC.
    3. Interior painted dash, complaints of paint rubbing off the dash and other interior panels has many owners quite upset.
    4. Other interior quality issues: air vent, clock, stereo...etc
    5. Exterior paint quality, seems people are upset about how easily it is scratched.
    6. Exterior/bed sheet metal is thin and dents easily. I saw one pic that showed 2" depressions in bed floor from hauling an ATV.
    7. Engine noise (sounds like a diesel).
    8. Bed Bounce. Ride quality is a problem, much worse than other trucks.
    9. TripleTech frame not being perceived as being as good as FBF by most owners, probably mostly due to #8 above.
    10. Remote Start has most every Tundra owner (that has it) upset and wishing they didn't get it and urge others to buy aftermarket.

    Did I miss any? I am sure I did. Anyway, like I said, don't you agree that this many quality issues in the first year of a huge new vehicle launch is a problem that will affect the sales and success of the Tundra? Do you really think the Tundra will continue to see the sales growth with so many owners upset with the recent downward trend in quality from Toyota?
  • blckislandguyblckislandguy Member Posts: 1,150
    KHS, without referring me to links I'm just not going to have time to read, please give us the summary on these various tests. Is Tundra safer? Which tests?
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    The NHTSA frontal crash test was designed back in the 70s-80s when seatbelts were first put into wide usage. The vehicle is slammed into a barrier full front at 35 mph ( as if a driver drove squarely into a wall ). Essentially it tests the ability of the seatbelts to hold the occupants in place

    The IIHS test, which is the standard test in the rest of the world also, uses a 40% offset ( as if two drivers swerved out of the way but still hit headon about 40% of the way across the front of the vehicle ) and at a higher speed. This type of collision tends to tear the vehicles apart with multi-directional forces not just forward and back. It also throws the occupants around inside the cabin more than the NHTSA test, again not just forward and back.

    The side tests are a huge failing of the NHTSA and they recognize it. Their barrier simulates an auto crashing into the side impact door beam of the vehicle being tested. That happens to be the strongest part of the vehicle on the side.

    The IIHS test simulates an SUV or truck front end crashing through the window glass of an auto or other vehicle. The barrier is much larger and much higher up the side of the impacted vehicle. There is no comparison between these two tests.

    The NHTSA has no test at all for rearend collisions.

    The IIHS two years ago instituted this test to try to reduce or to eliminate the risk of heck injuries and whiplash. It first measures the geometry of the head restrains, if there are any. some GM vehicles don't have head restraints in all seating positions. Then the newest technology has the seat and headrest move forward with the passenger in the event of a rearend collision so that when the seatbelts and normal forces bring the head and neck backward that distance is not too great and the headreast is positioned correctly to 'catch' the 'whipping' head with less force. No vehicle can get a top rating unless it gets top scores on all three tests.

    In addition now, ESC has to be at least available for the IIHS criteria.

    Again the NHTSA says nothing about ESC. Although ESC will be mandated for all vehicles on the road by 2012.

    That's the summary of the tests.

    The Tundra and the F150 and the Titan and the Ram all get top marks in the 40% offset frontal crash test.

    None of the trucks have been tested for side impact crashes.

    Only the Tundra gets a top mark in the Rear crash test.

    Only the Tundra has ESC ( VSC ) standard on every model.

    For some reason GM has not provided any of its new GMT900s to the IIHS for testing. Thus the only rating shown there is for the 90's technology GMT800s, the 'Classics'. It has the worst performance of all the trucks.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Nevertheless despite all your efforts in various locations this vehicle still grows and grows month after month. There is no denying that some issues like the tailgate have to be corrected for the users satisfaction but as the several reports on the Tundra Owners thread indicate the vehicle is making a lot of new friends.

    The little things will get corrected and the basic superior performance and safety will shine through. Several months ago I said that this was a marathon not a sprint. 10 yrs from now we'll reassess.
  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    I'm just not at all worried about rear-end crash ratings. I've never heard of a fatality in a full size pickup that was rear-ended, unless it was by a semi-tractor/trailer. You've got 6 feet of bed and frame, minimum, in all pickups before the oncoming vehicle gets into the passenger cabin. I'm much more concerned about head-on crash results and tests. Here, the Tundra gets a last place finish in the NHTSA test. Even the Toyota guys are head scratching over that. You can read there posts right here on Edmunds. Their disappointment really shows, as it should.

    Also, what does either the IIHS and NHSTA say about the vehicle's ability to automatically call for emergency help once the crash occurs and the occupants are injured or dying? Zip, that's what. I'll take that over a one-star difference any day of the week. If IIHS and NHTSA were really interested in the ultimate passenger safety, that point would be factored into the equation. All the ratings in the world don't mean squat once the crash occurs and someone is bleeding and unconscious. From then on, it's up to God and OnStar to save your [non-permissible content removed]. Or just God, if you don't have OnStar.

  • 12ozcurls12ozcurls Member Posts: 65
    too bad Honda doesn't make a decent sized pick up.....
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    Yeah it seems they just are not interested in a V8 which it needs for a truck not to mention to compete against Lexus which they had intended with the Acura line.
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    "The IIHS test simulates an SUV or truck front end crashing through the window glass of an auto or other vehicle. The barrier is much larger and much higher up the side of the impacted vehicle. There is no comparison between these two tests."

    Where's the logic?

    If you want us to believe what you say to be true there has to be some logic to it. From what you've been saying the IIHS is much more difficult than the test that the NHTSA does. If that is TRUELY the case, the Tundra should have had absolutely no problem passing the NHTSA test. Since it did not receive a five star rating from the NHTSA but did so from the IIHS, LOGIC would dictate that the NHTSA test as more difficult.

    Obviously your logic is flawed.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    No it's your reading that's flawed.

    You were quoting what I wrote about the side crash tests. What I wrote is exactly correct. However trucks are not tested yet for side impacts by the IIHS. There are no ratings for any of them. That doesn't mean that the NHTSA test, which is done, is any les outdated.

    The NHTSA it self says its own test is of little use in predicting suvivability in a side crash,

    You also don't unhderstand the ranking system of the NHTSA tests themselves. I'll leave it to the student to do the researach to find out why the top rated Silverado may only have 2% 'less risk of injury' than the Tundra in the NHTSA's frontal crash test.

    Here is the final nail in the coffin of the Federal Government's tests. They themselves admit that the testing that they do is of little use in predicting 'safety' because people are still being hurt severely even in their top rated vehicles beyond what the statistics would indicate.

    All you can really say is that
    a 4-5 star ranking is a passing grade
    3 stars is marginal
    1 and 2 stars ( there are NONE by the way ) is a failing grade.
    And these are all just recommendations. The rankings have no teeth to them.

    Now YOUR logic might make you believe that the Feds tests are more difficult but THEIR data and results lead THEM to a different conclusion.
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    Ok lets try this again:

    The NHTSA frontal crash test was designed back in the 70s-80s when seatbelts were first put into wide usage. The vehicle is slammed into a barrier full front at 35 mph ( as if a driver drove squarely into a wall ). Essentially it tests the ability of the seatbelts to hold the occupants in place

    The IIHS test, which is the standard test in the rest of the world also, uses a 40% offset ( as if two drivers swerved out of the way but still hit headon about 40% of the way across the front of the vehicle ) and at a higher speed. This type of collision tends to tear the vehicles apart with multi-directional forces not just forward and back. It also throws the occupants around inside the cabin more than the NHTSA test, again not just forward and back.

    This is how you summarized both tests and your conclusion was that the NHTSA was an old test born in the 70s and not realistic as it tests only seatbelts while the IIHS represented more real world. Right?

    So again if the IIHS testing is so much harder that the NHTSA why couldn't the Tundra receive five stars? I mean geez if a Ford could do it...

    BTW I don't really expect an answer since Toyota engineers are still working on it.
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJMember Posts: 3,516
    ...several crash test discussions in the Automotive News and Views Board. You can continue that line of debate there.

    kcram - Pickups Host
Sign In or Register to comment.