2007 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - All Comments

17:11, Sure, I'd be glad to explain; none of these comments may be true, anonymity online tends to make people bold and/or exaggerate, if not make up complete lies altogether.

And on the off chance that all of those comments are actually true, then that is an extremely rare case of a Dodge outlasting a Toyota. That would not be the norm, Toyota's reputation is one of quality and longevity, because that's the experience that practically everyone that owns one has with it.

Personally, I've never met one single person who was less than thrilled with their Toyota's performance. Keep in mind, that's in REAL life. It's that simple.

My old Honda had 260k when I traded it and so what? It still had the power to go another 100k... I do not need no stinking facts about DoDges going over 60k miles. OOOOO my Dodge has 100,000 miles beat that!!! It's only had like 4 paint jobs and the engine is a mitsubishi, and did I add that mine was not really built by Dodge, but by the government since they bailed out my beloved Chrysler.

"There's a pretty important word in that report, and that word would be "Initial."

Funny how you seized on the word "initial" and glossed over how Buick, Lincoln, Mercury, and Cadillac still have higher quality than Toyota, Honda, and Acura after three years.

10:24 What Silverado were you looking at? Must have been an old work truck 1500 V6 stripper... I have a new fully loaded Silverado Vortec Max model that is great. I remember a new Accord I had years ago that when it hit 100,000 miles had the heater core fail in the interior and numerous other expensive repairs at 100,000 miles, timing belts, trans problems etc. I was also wise to trade it in. I cannot see the sense in keeping very high mileage imports with high repair costs.

If you look at construction sites, you never see a Toyota Tundra. Invariably, contractors use Chevy's, Ford's, GMC'c or Dodges. The likely customer for a Tundra is a suburban housewife who uses it to carry groceries or soccer uniforms, which is about all the Tundra is good for.

10:24 Thank You! Someone else that finally sees the light of day.

Ford's and Chevy's are nothing more than outdated, inefficient, cheaply made engines wrapped in crappy, thin tin that isn't put together straight. Look at their fenders, with those two little rods, or braces, that are supposed to keep the whole fender from just flapping in the wind I guess. Look at a Toyota body. MUCH better made. And everybody knows that their engines and transmissions are decades ahead of the competition.

"I do not need no stinking facts about DoDges going over 60k miles."

I think you're missing a numeral there, bud. The Dodge had 260,000 miles. Let us know when your Honda Odyssey gets that many miles. It should be a memorable event, because you will have just bought your fifth transmission.

"Ford's and Chevy's are nothing more than outdated, inefficient, cheaply made engines wrapped in crappy, thin tin that isn't put together straight. Look at their fenders, with those two little rods, or braces, that are supposed to keep the whole fender from just flapping in the wind I guess. Look at a Toyota body. MUCH better made. And everybody knows that their engines and transmissions are decades ahead of the competition."

Boy have you got your facts mixed up! Everything you stated holds true AGAINST the Tundra. Need we resurrect the post 19:36, I believe, from the previous Tundra review with over 500 comments?

Or how about "the truth about trucks" video.

Oh.. I wouldn't know about NOT seeing Tundras on the work site. I actually used to be a salesman at a contractor supply center. I did this job for around 5 years. When the Tundra came out, you wouldn't believe how many contractors of ours bought them.

If you still see more Fords and Chevys at the job site, again this is mostly due to the fact that Tundras have only been manufactured for 5 or 6 years. Not long in comparison to the almost 100 years that Ford or Chevy have had to make theirs. You would think that with that many years of experience, these two would have figured out how to make a modern and reliable truck.

The Chevy truck I looked at was a fully loaded Chevy with all the trimmings. I think the biggest joke of all was when I put my finger through the grille and gave it a little tug. The grille was made out of flimsy, flexible plastic. Not that there's anything wrong with plastic, but seriously - this was the same plastic I'd imagine flower pots being made out of. Sort of rubbery. The story went for the rest of the truck.

If you've only looked at Chevys, then perhaps you don't really know any better and think that having flimsy plastic hardware on a giant truck is A-OK. I was not impressed with the build quality at all. Seemed like your typical GM product complete with a healthy supply of cheap creaky plastic inside and out. That and just an absolute mess of an engine, complete with sloppily laid out wiring and hoses.

As far as seeing housewives driving Tundras, well I can say that perhaps 75% of all full sized trucks I see on the road aren't being used for work. More like big burly dudes in the suburbs pulling their little trailers full of 4-wheelers and other toys on weekends. To be honest, the idea of having a full sized truck for non other than driving is totally ridiculous, yet I did read some report that mentioned that 70% of all people who buy them do exactly that.

I can guarantee that I use my little Tacoma for way more real work than some of the bozos driving these 15 MPG gas-guzzling wannabe trucks out there anyday. Most of these full sized trucks are just grocery getters and nothing else. Either that or they're bought with a thin excuse to do "work" - like haul an equally useless 5th wheel travel camper. Everyone complains about high gas prices, yet they go out and buy massive trucks and SUVs.

In regards to quality... well ANY car will last 3 years. Ever hear anyone brag about a 3 year old car? " Hey, my car is a whopping 3 YEARS old and it still runs!" But we're not talking 3 years. We're talking about whether a Buick will last 10-12 years or more and go at least 200k. I seriously doubt it. How about make a serious report? I can bet you anything that if there was a real long term survey, those Buicks, Chevys. and other piece of crap cars would fall right off the list after 4-5 years. Don't deny it. You know it's true.

All Honda vehicles are Honda Odysseys. In that note too, I have seen more with over 200,000 miles than I have seen a Chrysler vehicle. Everyone brings the Odyssey in, but fails to mention that a Windstar, Venture, or Caravan has more problems.

05:38 Yeah, okay. A Honda minivan burning up transmissions. Even the kids that run the Civics around at 8000 rpm rarely have transmission troubles. Try using a Dodge like that; after about an hour it'll be spewing out every kind of fluid that it contains, and you'll be shopping for a new engine, transmission, and gears. Please. Just because Dodge was German-owned for a while doesn't mean they learned anything about how to engineer a car so it isn't a piece of garbage.

I once had a new stock Dodge Challenger RT 340 Six Pack 4 speed and drove it very hard without a complaint. Also to run a tuner Civic as you described has a tremendous amount of money under the hood and they still can blow motors. I have a co worker that removed his supercharger and just blew his Civic Turbo up recently... anyway want to stay on topic? The new domestics are simply superior in all respects in my opinion to the current imports in stock form. I consider the drivetrains very suspect.

Yes, obviously Toyota cars are so great that CNN-Money includes them on their "Used Cars to Avoid" list because of the Toyota engine sludging problem.

And surely everybody on this site talking about blown transmissions on their Honda must be lying, right? And not just Honda, but Lexus, too -- read about the RX330, for starters! The Toyota and Honda apologists are funny in trying to cover that up.

They even try to gloss over the fact that Buick, Lincoln, Cadillac, and Mercury continue to be rated higher in quality than Toyota or Honda, even after the cars are three years old, which is close to when most people would be thinking about trading a car in, anyway.

I don't know why somebody would brag about driving a 10-year old Civic -- that's nothing to be proud of.

My friend owns a Tundra and between the engine sludging problems and the almost daily recalls, he has hardly had the chance to use it! Meanwhile my professional grade 1988 GMC half-ton continues to perform flawlessly.

I'm the writer of that 19:36 comment in the 500+ comment thread. I apparently am the only one who knows how to identify a thick frame rail and a thin frame rail. Yeah, Toyota's have thicker frame rails? Get your eyes checked! Buy yourself a measuring tape or ruler and measure the thickness, height, and width of any Toyota frame rail and compare it to any other frame rail on any other truck.

As I have said before, the frame of an S-10 or Ranger are as thick as any 1/2 ton pickup. They're just shorter because the truck is shorter, but the frame is really over-kill for a 1/4 ton truck. Take that measuring tape or ruler and measure the width and thickness of any Toyota leaf spring and see if it's not thinner than any domestic leaf spring, even on a Ranger or S-10. Would you please do this before you comment again?

Mike Row is not bluffing when he talks about Ford's "big, honkin' leaf springs". Their leaf springs are thicker than most trucks and they are three inches wide, which is wider than all 1/2 ton trucks.

Take a look at the crossmembers of the new Tundra and check out all of the quarter-sized holes cut across the cross member. How is a crossmember supposed to hold your frame rails together when half of them have been cut off of the truck? Wouldn't it be smarter to weld big bulky steel arms from one rail to the other, like Ford?

So Chevy, Ford, and Dodge have not figured out how to make a reliable truck in 100 years? I'm pretty sure they figured out that formula in the 70s, which is why my C20 is sitting in my driveway right now with an original engine, transmission, driveshaft, differential, axles, wheel hubs, you name it. Only some sheet metal has been replaced.

So flimsy door handles make a Chevy bad? Whatever! Oh no the door handles are flimsy, it's not able to haul multiple tons because of the door handles. You must be that guy that said Toyota's are better because the tailgate (which never handles a heavy load) and doors (which are light and cave in on impact) shut better than a domestic's doors or tailgate.

I have never questioned whether California produces more agriculture than Kentucky; I question how heavy the "serious" loads these Tacoma's are hauling really are. You seem never to be able to name an actual payload number. Use grams instead of pounds if want to make it sound better. 400 pounds is a serious load for a Tacoma. A Ranger doesn't even know it's there. We haul engines and transmissions with our delivery Rangers and barely squat them with 400+ pounds. Thin leaf springs are useless along with small frame rails. You need to put your metal where your mouth is. I physically have thousands of pounds of steel to back up what I'm saying, you don't.

You say a Tacoma puts a Ranger to shame when it sits next to it. How's that? Are you sure that's not what's going through your mind when YOU see a Tacoma sitting next to a Ranger, simply because you hate Ford? That's just your perspective. I don't see a Ranger being put to shame when it sits next to a Tacoma. Instead, I see a small truck that has such heavier and tougher frame rails, it could bend the Tacoma into a "V" if it rammed it. The metal is there to do this. It's not able to do this simply because I say so, it's able to do this because the metal IS THERE to do this. It's got a bigger frame, bigger control arms, bigger leaf springs, bigger cross-members without a million holes punched through it, more weight and more steel all around. The Mazda B-series is the same exact thing as a Ford Ranger, and they can't keep enough of them on the lot at the Mazda dealership because they sell so fast. Why would Mazda or Ford get rid of that? They are everywhere, where I live.

So 260,000 miles is not good enough for you? How about 294,200 miles? That's what my delivery F-150 has on it as of today. Of course you'll just stretch your numbers to stay on top. If I have 300,000 miles on my Ford, then you have 600,000 miles on your Toyota, and if I have 600,000 miles on my Ford, then you have 1,200,000 miles on your Toyota and on and on.

First, Ford are crap because their drivetrains supposedly only last 50,000 miles before needing replaced, then they're crap because their drivetrains only last 200,000 miles, and now they're crap because their drivetrains only last 300,000 miles. Just keep bending the numbers.

Also, with the recalls: No one argues whether the domestics have had many recalls, but keep in mind how many more millions of vehicles the domestics have sold over the past "say 20 years". If Toyota was already cranking out the numbers in the 80's that it's cranking out now, they would've already had well beyond 3.3 million recalls and so forth. It's easy to make quality vehicles when you don't have to work as hard to crank them out as your competitors.

You think everyone is happy with their Accord's and Camry's and everyone hates their Tauruses and Fusion's? Go check out Yahoo Autos and see what real-world people are saying with their real-world experience. The Fusion and Taurus have an average 4.5 stars, while the Accord and Camry currently have an average 2.5 stars. I think the tides are turning, if you want to keep talking about what "everyone knows".

I loved my '96 Accord, but I turned against it after reading the arrogance of these pro-import comments. That's why I traded it in for a '00 F-150 after watching my '01 delivery F-150 go from 214,000 miles to 294,000 miles, since I started driving it.