Toyota on the mend?

drfill · April 2007

My final word on Toyota sales release.

I think any of the domestics would like to have Toyota's "sales problems". A sales record here, a sales record there.

If Toyota is having trouble, what do you call the domestics? :confuse:

DrFill

louiswei · April 2007

If Toyota is having trouble, what do you call the domestics?

I'll take this one...

How about "dead in the water"?

:P

gagrice · April 2007

Are you guys tag teaming me? :shades:

I think GM is doing just ok, Ford is hurting, and Chrysler is for sale at a bargain price. Mercedes is doing quite well, as is BMW. VW is doing fine.

Toyota has proven again, UGLY sells. Honda just was awarded most green by some group of scientists. Now is everyone happy?

louiswei · April 2007

Actually gagrice, I think GM is doing quite okay as well. If I have to bet my life saving on one auto manufacture now, it'll be in this order:

1. Toyota
2. BMW
3. Honda
4. GM :surprise:

Talking about ugly sells, looks to me both Toyota and BMW can do no wrong these days...

kdhspyder · April 2007

I think what this shows is that the products are in a state of change. As louiswei noted the BoF SUV's are changing as are the Scions. The BoF vehicles are changing throughout the industry as all of them are down sharply since the first fuel spike after Katrina.

GM has stolen a march on the market by getting the lambda's to market before the others ( Cya Envoy and TrailBlazer ); Ford has announced that the next Explorer will be a unibody vehicle not a BoF; ditto Nissan and the Pathfinder. Only Dodge and Toyota have yet to speak. The Big BoF SUV's ( Tahoe, Yukon, Expedition, Sequoia ) days may be numbered or they may be marginalized.

The Scion line will be over-hauled by the end of the year.

The key for all vehicle makers is to get new product ( vehicles not previously existing ) to market first. Examples are the Prius and other hybrids by Toyota; the lambda's by GM; diesel SUV's ( by DC? ); small diesel trucks ( by anyone ); light diesel vehicles.

carguy58 · April 2007

"Talking about ugly sells, looks to me both Toyota and BMW can do no wrong these days..."

Yeah but of late the 3 Series has been carrying BMW sales on its back. The sales of the 5 Series have cooled down signifcantly and 7 Series I think it sold well upon initial launch but I can't even remember the last time I saw a 7 Series.

punkr77 · April 2007

I Toytota's sales problem, if indeed it is a problem (they are #2), should be fixed next year. New Corolla, Matrix, Scion Xa, Scion Xb, etc. I say should because it depends on how good the new models are relative to competitors. As models age, sales drop as competitors introduce newer models with newer features and looks. By next year Toyota will have redone the vast majority of its models in 2 or 3 years.

As much as I hate government programs, perhaps universal health care would be a boon to American companies. Health care costs are eating them alive, especially when they can open overseas to countries like Canada or China that take care of it or to 3rd world countries where no one expects it. Like I said, I hate government programs, but perhaps it would be good for big business.

imidazol97 · April 2007

People paying taxes will be bearing the cost of healthcare for the other 2/3 of the population soon if it's ever implemented here. It sounds good but it's not. There are problems with healthcare now and people who do pay taxes are paying for a large fraction of the population's healthcare who don't pay taxes now.

hypnosis44 · April 2007

Amusing.

"People paying taxes will be bearing the cost of healthcare for the other 2/3 of the population soon if it's ever implemented here. It sounds good but it's not. There are problems with health care now and people who do pay taxes are paying for a large fraction of the population's healthcare who don't pay taxes now."

Only 1/3 of the population pay taxes now!? - interesting, which 1/3 would that be?

Those of us with health care are paying for all of those without it through emergency care which costs up to 50 times what medical coverage would cost.

We spend twice as much on health care per capita in the US than the other industrial nations, and we get less than half the care for it.

If we apply good old American ingenuity to single payer health care we can show the world how to do it, and still make money on other peoples suffering!

stever · April 2007

Let's get back to Toyota please or at least make a shallow attempt at tying health care expenses to Toyota's place in the universe.

hypnosis44 · April 2007

Thanks. I should have made it clearer re: "Let's get back to Toyota please or at least make a shallow attempt at tying health care expenses to Toyota's place in the universe."

It relates to the leveling of the playing field for American unionized manufacturers who are in competition with the Japanese makers mostly non unionized plants. The latter pay far less in medical coverage costs for workers and retirees, when they offer plans at all, than do American makers.

This has an effect on the available money to invest in R&R, marketing, and capital improvements. Unfortunately, it seems to have had no effect on the criminal bonuses paid to executives.

stever · April 2007

Thanks; just to be clear I didn't mean to single you out when I hit reply. The whole thread took a 90 back there.

hypnosis44 · April 2007

You must be aware that the failures of the 401 plans have made the financial publications for some time now. The idea that one can become a successful investor with a "few hours of education" can only be made by those not counting, or not investing. I have done fairly well with thousands of hours (yes) of time invested over the years. Some stats. show that even the presumably more sophisticated investor class (educated yuppie) fails to even break even with the market. This is attributed to the predicted, but ignored reality that people left to their own devices follow the most conservative route (money markets primarily) because of the risks involved. Consider that only the smallest percentage of mutual funds with their billions of dollars of research and "expertise" ever beat or equal the indexes. Add this to the continued reports of criminal activity within corporations and people are justifiably inclined to stick their money in a mattress. To those who believe this is not their problem; consider the impact on the GDP from the largest generation ever suddenly hitting retirement with just enough to get by on, if they are lucky.

The tie in to the discussion is that companies like Toyota are short changing their workers and putting the responsibility for their future survival on the rest of us, as well a future generations. This is another example of an uneven playing field benefiting a morally corrupt opponent. If they could use child labor here, does anyone really think they would not?

hypnosis44 · April 2007

No offence taken - it was a legitimate reminder and makes the posts more cogent.

Thanks

imidazol97 · April 2007

>"People paying taxes will be bearing the cost of healthcare for the other 2/3 of the population soon if it's ever implemented here.

Note the future passive tense, "will be beaaring," and that meant in the future years-not now.

My view is that businesses, Toyota included, would benefit and the taxpayers would lose. Already many people pay too much. Having government run it will not be good.

Toyota has to work carefully to avoid what has caught GM and Ford and many other companies and that is the extra high costs of healthcare which are out of control and which are increasing. Toyota will be getting rid of older workers who raise the cost of the programs. I see that as Toyota's greatest damage control topic. And they can always start to move plants to other countries.

We agree on the last two paragraphs.

This was in context of Toyota and in deference to the Host my last post unless the topic continues.

fezo · April 2007

"Let's get back to Toyota please or at least make a shallow attempt at tying health care expenses to Toyota's place in the universe."

If I went to the doctor's in my daughter's Camry would that count? :P

Sorry. Couldn't help myself.

nippononly · April 2007

announcement I read on the new LX570 (which I thought looked pretty similar to the current model, I was surprised its styling had evolved so little), I didn't read anything on the next-gen Land Cruiser, which should share everything with the LX if it is still around. Any word on that, anyone?

I know the next-gen Sequoia is on hold, and with sales of the brand new Tahoe in freefall after only one year, I am not sure they should bother with a redo. Just continue the Land Cruiser and call it a day. The new extendo Highlander will fill in some, and there is still the Sienna for the soccer crowd. Not to mention a CrewMax Tundra for those who were really going to use their Sequoia for something trucky.

There are too many BOF SUVs at Toyota. No wonder Honda got named the greenest car company...

drfill · April 2007

It's been 4 years, and Lexus could really use the HPX now, with the GX starting to decline, and the LX bucking the trend.

I forget if the 4Runner can have a 3rd row, but with HL and Sienna, and eevn the Rav4 with 3rd row, a full-size is not good, at this time. Gas should be $3.50 this summer. :sick:

With the Infinit EX concept, Toyota is well behind in crossovers. A Rav4-based crossover, and HPX are now overdue. On appeal, the EX is easily ahead of the RDX and X3, IMO.

DrFill

louiswei · April 2007

I was pretty disappointed with the new LX's exterior. Too much current gen and not enough "L-finess" which I think truly took the whole Lexus line to another level. Hopefully the new RX will fair better with the upcoming re-do. The interior, on the other hand looks rock solid and has "LS" written all over it. Easily one of the best SUV interiors I've seen in recent years.

Agree with there are too many BOF SUVs in Toyota's line. I would keep the LC since it's Toyota's HALO SUV but make the next 4Runner/GX unibody, 3-row standard and seats 7 comfortably. It has to be at least comparable in size with the GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook. I still think there is a decent size market for FE unibody full size SUVs. Oh yeah, and the Sequoia has to go, period.

louiswei · April 2007

The 4Runner does have an optional 3rd row seating but it's more suitable for small size children. Due to its BOF design although it looks big the interior space is very cramped. As matter of fact, the current HL has more interior space than the 4Runner. Nevertheless it is a very nice truck-based SUV, the base V6 has plenty kicks and the Limited Edition comes fully equipped with all kinds of luxury.

I think rumor has it that Toyota/Lexus have a small crossover in the pipeline. It'll be slotted under the RX and should compete with the RDX and X3. I saw the Infiniti EX concept as well, not impressed. The exterior is graceful looking but it has one heck of an ugly interior.

As for the future Toyota/Lexus SUV/CUV lineup, I think it all depends on whether or not the 4Runner will survive. Here's my prediction:

If Toyota decides to keep the 4Runner:

RAV4 - stay
HL - stay, the new model is perfect size wise
4Runner - switch to unibody, seats 7 with standard 3rd row
Sequoia - axe
FJ Cruiser - stay
LC - stay as Toyota's HALO SUV

RX - stay
GX - switch to unibody with 4Runner
LX - stay
IX(?) - compact luxury CUV seats 5 and loaded with gadgets. Starting at around $35K and tops out at $45K

If Toyota decides to axe the 4Runner:

RAV4 - stay
HL - Increase the size slightly to offer roomier 3rd row seating
4Runner - axe
Sequoia - axe
FJ Cruiser - stay
LC - stay as Toyota's HALO SUV and offer a strip down version to serve as Toyota's mainstream large SUV

RX - move up in size with the HL
GX - axe
LX - stay
IX(?) - compact luxury CUV seats 5 and loaded with gadgets. Starting at around $35K and tops out at $45K

I personally like to see Toyota keeps the 4Runner because I think that'll give them a more versatile SUV/CUV lineup.

nippononly · April 2007

is a Toyota icon, not to mention its costs of R&D are defrayed because it is a global model. Can't make it unibody when you already have a 7-seat unibody HL - what's the point?

I would like to see them merge the 4Runner and FJ Cruiser into one line that continues as the 4Runner, smaller and less expensive than the current 4Runner, fully capable offroad, with the expectation that it will be a model with smaller sales than the mommymobiles.

And just kill the Sequoia, call it a day on that one.

You know, if they would make a less loaded Land Cruiser trim that started in the mid-$40K range, they wouldn't need a Sequoia anyway. Around the world they sell stripped Land Cruisers with diesel engines - they could easily bring one here with a gas engine. The LC and LX are too close together in spec anyway.

drfill · April 2007

Maybe I'm too sentimental, but learning how to drive on a '91 4Runner, seeing it still producing 100k sales, even 15 years later, the brand is very strong, and deserves a spot in the lineup. It may not make it through the next decade, but there obviously is a devoted market for it.

How I would comprise Toyota's SUV line-up:

FJ: Not a fan, since this budget allocation indefinitely delayed the Next Supra. Niche vehicle. Could be considered a Wrangler competitor, I guess. It's too much of an oddball to influence 4Runner sales.

Rav4: Success. No changes.

HL: Kinda queer new styling, but not enough to hurt sales. Will get it's numbers.

4Runner: I, personally, would make it bigger, Acadia sized, and work to make the 3rd row as efficient as possible. Height-adjustable suspension maybe necessary. Sacrifice some 4WD hardware to make it more street-ready. V6 and V8. Would outperform Acadia, on road or off.

Sequioa: Done.

Now with Lexus, the GX has been a success, outselling the Infinit FX (Car-based), and given the shared platform, I'm sure it has made a nice profit for Toyota.

If the GX grows, gets wider, less off-road biased, more street-ready, no reason it can't sell 30-40k again. Also take into account many families would like to have a vehicle that can tow more than 2 tons, which car-based SUVs seem to top out at. :surprise:

In making the HPX, Lexus is running into a problem, because the next RX is to get larger and offer V8 power plus 3rd row seating, so that will limit the appeal of something larger.

Making a $33k SUV for Lexus of the Rav4 really should've been started already, if that's in the plans. I haven't seen big sales from X3 or RDX to warrant much on Lexus'
radar. We'll see.

DrFill

drfill · April 2007

Nippon, you see a smaller 4Runner.

I see a bigger 4Runner.

The only problem axing the Sequioa, and belittling the 4Runner is what happens if you want to tow? :confuse:

DrFill

louiswei · April 2007

Don't think the 4Runner is as big of a Toyota "off-road" icon as the Land Cruiser. Maybe in the US it is but around the world Land Cruiser still holds THE "off-road Toyota" title.

HL is going to be a midsize CUV and 4Runner has the potential to become Toyota's Full size unibody CUV. 3 BOF SUVs are just way too many for Toyota at this point IMO. As matter of fact, how many 4Runner owners take their car to go "serious" off-roading in a regular basis anyway? A good unibody CUV will take care of "casual" off-roading duty without little sweat, just look at the Honda Pilot.

My father has his 4Runner for about 2 years now and that thing has never gotten its shoes dirty at least ONCE! :surprise:

louiswei · April 2007

So, drfill, are you proposing to keep the 4Runner as truck-based and make it larger? Wouldn't that just become another Sequoia.

I would like to see Toyota keeps the 4Runner too (and I think they would because it is too important of a name for them to kill it) but I just don't see how they can support 3 BOF SUVs in their lineup. Agree that the next 4Runner should be Acadia-sized but I would prefer to see it with an unibody design and more FE. Maybe we'll see a hybrid 4Runner with the RX's 400h engine, who knows...

drfill · April 2007

The 4Runner was made to be BOF, so changing that defeats the purpose. The HL is here to compliment the 4Runner.

Rav4, 4Runner, and HL are all successful. Sequioa not so much.

FJ is some kind of Wrangler competitor, so I don't see a conflict in interest.

If you kill the Sequioa, something has to kinda pick up the slack. The Acadia forces Toyotas hand, if you ask me.

The Acadia has weaknesses. No V8, not a great tow vehicle, slightly underpowered (4800 lbs.), and has very limited off-road ability.

4Runner, if you take off half the 4WD hardware, is twice the off-raoder the Acadia is. A V8 and a 7k tow rating, with a useful 3rd seat, would hurt Acadia.

That would be my plan.

Oh, and I need it by Sept. 2009.

DrFill

louiswei · April 2007

I agree a 4Runner with unibody and limited off-roading capability does sound weird but I am pretty sure the majority of the buyers wouldn't notice the difference. I see HL to be Toyota's midsize CUV and 4Runner becomes the fullsize CUV.

If you have been paying attention, all BOF SUV sales are dropping like a rock and that's including 4Runner. It was Toyota's hottest selling SUV just not long ago (3 years?) but not anymore.

I have faith in Toyota to make a capable off-roading unibody 4Runner which can totally smoke Acadia both on the highway and dirt road. :P

paisan · April 2007

They need a full size SUV for towing. Something to compete with the Escalade/Yukon/Expedition/Armadas of the world. I personally dislike Toyota but would have looked at one when buying my Armada for the reliability factor alone. But the towing capacities were dismal on them

-mike

drfill · April 2007

Isn't that what I just said?

Toyota owners will need a tow vehicle, and if you've been paying attention, 4Runner sales are still strong, and a more street-friendly, accomodating 3rd row vehicle, that can still tow, will enhance it's appeal.

DrFill

paisan · April 2007

But the 4-runner is not at all in the full-size area. Sequoia is horrible as a tow vehicle!

-mike

louiswei · April 2007

How about a strip-down Land Cruiser with the 5.7 V8 running around high $30K to mid $40K? That'll fit in Sequoia's old slot pretty good.

That also leaves the room for 4Runner to become Toyota's main big people mover.

I see RAV4 and HL to become the backbone of Toyota's SUV/CUV lineup which appeal to the majority buying public with 4Runner, LC and FJ become specialists.

4Runner - large people mover CUV
FJ Cruiser - serious off-roading
Base LC - towing and off-roading
Luxury LC - HALO SUV with good off-roading capability

kdhspyder · April 2007

I agree that moving the 4R to a unibody and making it almost Sequoia size is a smart idea. The 4Runner nameplate should never be lost it's right behind the LandCruiser in recognized reliability and can-do performance.

But the 4R has evolved from what was a truck with a canopy to take deep offroad to a semi-luxo commuter. It still 'can do' but people blanche at the thought of scraping and denting their $30-$45,000 beauty on some offroad track or swamp.

Enter the FJ. It may be even more capable offroad than the 4R. Throw a diesel in one or both.

drfill · April 2007

As again that defeats the purpose, and kills it's towing.

Toyota needs a tow vehicle, and shouldn't have to pay $40k to get one.

4Runner jobs: moderate off-raod ability, V8 power available, frame that can tow 7k, convenient 3rd row seating

DrFill

paisan · April 2007

I'm with you guys on making the LC the Top, then make the 4-runner almost sequoia size and bump it's towing to 9000lbs at least.

If you don't have an SUV towing 9k lbs these days you are not even in the running for most folks business in terms of towing/hauling, so you'd have one that can tow more than the competition but not really up into the full-size class.

At best it would compete with the Durango which is neither here nor there.

-mike

petl · April 2007

Don't forget Toyota's new car based cross-over (based on the FT-SX) scheduled to be released in 2008. It will resemble a tall wagon.

punkr77 · April 2007

I wonder what percentage of SUV buyers (particularly Toyota buyers) actually use towing capacity as prime consideration. I'm sure there are some (mostly boat owners and RV'ers), but I would think it's a fairly small number. Most of the people I know who tow, go for pickups (and wouldn't consider a Toyota anyway).

I'd think that was even more true overseas (where Toyota also sells a bunch). Generally I'd think SUV buyers would be more concerned with ride (which usually gets worse as towing capacity gets bigger) and luxury/features/styling vs competiors.

paisan · April 2007

I know a ton of boaters and RVers who want seating >4 coupled with towing capacity and want the reliability of Japanese vehicles. Most of the folks who tow use Pickups because they are the only game in town. As I said I would have chosen a Toyota over my Armada if it had the towing capacity.

As for ride and handling? My Armada has 4-wheel indy suspension and rides like a caddy AND can tow 9000lbs+ I would think Toyota could easily outbuild Nissan, but hasn't.

-mike

poncho167 · April 2007

I don't know where you are from but from my 4x4 days Toyota's are known only as average off road. I have known a couple of people who have had them. There are quite a few vehicles made that fair much better off road than a Toyota. The Land Cruiser is an old name being Toyota's first Jeep like 4 wheel drive vehicle, so I suppose that because of it's heritage it is considered off roadable.

Incidently, the Silverado with the locking rear-end is much more capable off road than the new Tundra limited slip rear end.

poncho167 · April 2007

Totally smoke it huh. The Acadia and others like it rarely if ever will see the off road. They are basically cars with truck bodies.

anythngbutgm · April 2007

Incidently, the Silverado with the locking rear-end is much more capable off road than the new Tundra limited slip rear end.

Curious, did you test this for yourself? Cause I would be very interested in a writeup of your findings. I have yet to come across one. Thanks

nippononly · April 2007

of the 4Runner came along just at the wrong time, turning it into an American-style SUV just a year or two before gas prices shot up and all the American SUVs' sales went in the toilet (relative to their own earlier numbers).

I would like to see it go back to the days of some carpeting and a DOT-legal bench seat with belts tossed into the bed of a Tacoma. It was rugged, it wasn't expensive and it never pretended to be luxurious.

Toyota should bet on the success of the '08 Highlander to rope in all the soccer moms, and turn the 4Runner into a niche model like the FJ, which we all know isn't going to survive more than one generation. I mean, REALLY!

The Sequoia is all but done, and the only worry at Toyota Central is that they made it too big and with too-thirsty engines right when the segment is dying on the vine due to huge gas prices. Well, whatever folks, it's DONE. No point in crying now, or in reengineering it. Build it, see if you can grab some Tahoe and Suburban sales,and kill it after the next gen if it doesn't sell well enough. Toyota is good at that (killing off worthy models just because the sales dropped below some magic number, usually 50K per year).

If they go into the next decade with the notion firmly planted that their BOF SUVs will sell to smaller crowds, and charge accordingly, I think it would be OK to have 3, including the niche Land Cruiser, with a 4Runner and Sequoia below it in price. I just don't know why they would continue the Land Cruiser when they have the next-gen Sequoia. The current LC isn't selling at all, we are talking 1000/year or less. For $5000 more you can just get the Lexus, and then why wouldn't you, in a price range that high to begin with?

As for offroading, of which I used to do plenty, it has been my experience that there are plenty of Toyotas out there. The only SUVs you ever really see are Jeeps and Toyotas - the occasional Explorer driver gets out there at his peril. Mostly you see pick-ups, not SUVs at all, and among those you see a fair number of Toyotas, along with the domestic brands. The old Land Cruisers (up through the FJ82) are pretty popular to jack up and take off-trail, but no-one is going to do that with any of the later models, which came along around 1992 if memory serves. After the FJ82, it got too expensive and too frou-frou. Up through the '02, the 4Runner makes a good model to take out there relatively stock as well as a good chassis for lifting and other stuff.

explorerx4 · April 2007

that is completely contrary to the history of the 4runner.
it is an off road capable vehicle. towing is left for something else.
ford is going down? Ha! Ha!

drfill · April 2007

You can keep the Land Cruiser at the high end, as a Halo model. And have the FJ at the low end, to work against Wrangler.

Then have Rav4, HL, and 4Runner be your compact, mid-size, and full-size players. They could all be unibody, and have the HPX share the next 4Runner redesign.

Which means getting rid of the GX, and replacing it with HPX, not complimenting it.

Lexus doens't need 4 SUVs. This becomes a problem with the emergence of a entry-level luxury SUV class. I don't think Lexus should enter until someone can generate 50k+ sales out of it.

Toyota does need a sports car! :shades:

DrFill

paisan · April 2007

Let me say, I'm not Toyota fan, however... I've offroaded a lot with my Isuzu Rodeo. I've been up and down the East Coast offroading, and the 4-Runners and Tacoma/Hi-lux/pre-tacoma pickups all were out there with us and all did very well along with the FJ on the trail. Heck we even had LCs out there with us. The full-sized Trucks like Sierras/KC/silverados/F150/Tahoe/Blazer were way way too big for the trails and the Jeeps were a bit over-rated.

As a total non-toyota fan I'd look at their SUV lineup and do something along the lines of:

Unibody Models
Rav4 (Cute-ute)
Highlander (mid-size ute)
XYZ (Full-size ute)

Non-Unibody Models/niche
FJ 2 and 4 door (Small/midsize offroader)
4-Runner (Collasal Towing monster to take on Suburban/Expedition/Armada use the Tundra underpinnings with 4-wheel indy suspension for a good ride)
LC (Mid-size Offroader w/uber luxo)

-Mike

That's just me

drfill · April 2007

5 is pushin' it, but maybe it's just me.

Acadia is really a sissified Tahoe, longer, no towing, no V8, no frame.

The 4Runner deserves a better fate than to be declawed. The HL should be like that.

I think we agree the Sequioa is not appropriate at this time.

DrFill

paisan · April 2007

Isn't the Acadia based off a stretched Equinox Platform, which is essentially a unibody mini-van frame?

The Tahoe is based off the 1500 series light-truck chassis.

Definitely agree, the 4-Runner should remain Framed with some offroad/manly attitude, and yeah the Sequoia has no ballz at all, it was a half hearted attempt at a fullsize SUV at best.

-mike

louiswei · April 2007

drfill, isn't that exactly what I said earlier?

Make 4Runner unibody along with RAV4 and HL as Toyota's CUVs and keep LC and FJ as the "real" SUVs.

If Toyota decides to go with this route then a strip-down version of the LC would be benefitial for off-roading and towing duties.

gagrice · April 2007

I think it would be a mistake to put the off road eggs in the FJ basket. I have talked to FJ owners. They have the same complaints that will limit the sales below what the 4Runner is generating in a downhill slide. The suicide doors and horrible visibility are killers in the FJ for most buyers. They appeal to those that want something REALLY different looking.

I am not much of a ToyLex fan but the 4Runner to me is something I would consider. It has a good history of REAL utility matched with good reliability.

ruking1 · April 2007

While I really liked the styling, when I sat in it it was almost like looking out of a tunnel-coccoon like!!! In the worst cases, the lack of visibility can be down right fatal. By comparison it makes the 1994/96 Toyota Landcruiser look like the cock pit of an F16.

( extreme wide angle and almost unlimited viewing)

poncho167 · April 2007

I saw the traction issue between the two trucks in a magazine (I think it was Road & Track) recently and they noted how the Toyota wasn't able to put the power to the ground but the Silverado hooked up nicely with both tires providing traction, not just one. The locker rear-ends that are available are far superior than any limited slip because you get equal power distribution to both tires.
The rear end on the Toyota was also noted by MotorWeek TV's weekly show along with the issue about the lack of frame cross members that the Tundra lacks compared to other full-sized trucks including the Tundra's main competitor, Nissan Titan.

Toyota on the mend?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles