2007 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - All Comments

13:16; 'Consumer Reports is BIASED against domestic automobiles'. What about every other publication that rates domestics much lower than imports in the last 20 years? Are they ALL BIASED? You see, their job is separate the junk (Ford, GM) from the good stuff (Toyota, Honda, Nissan). So, if GM and Ford consistently make garbage, and they do, they will consistently get low ratings.

Granted, Ford has taken steps to improve their quality, albeit small ones and not nearly enough yet, but better, and look, Consumer Reports now gives a couple of their vehicles good ratings. There is no BIAS. If GM ever stops making scrap again and makes a car worth driving, it'll get better ratings to. For now, Toyota is still miles ahead of them, has been for many years.

Consumer reports started publishing in 1936, which was a good 30+ years before Japanese cars were even sold in any large quantity in the US. To say that somehow or another, Consumer Reports must surely be the evil snaked-tongued mouthpiece of the Japanese auto industry and their evil job-robbing plight against all those hard-working union autoworkers is kind of silly. The fact of the matter is that in 1996, Consumer reports was involved in a lawsuit not with a domestic auto manufacture, but Isuzu.

Now I'm sure that there some people who think that the world would be perfect if the only cars allowed in the US were American-made and that we, as dutiful, patriotic citizens owe it to our countrymen to buy nothing, but US-made goods. But unfortunately, that's not how capitalism or free trade works. If we were as such, then we'd be more of a socialist country. Think about cold war era China and Russia and how they only cars and trucks you could buy were poorly made, state-owned vehicles that barely functioned. The fact that there was zero competition meant that there was no pressure to improve the product.

If the US had kept this policy, then we would still probably be driving huge clunky cast iron engined cars that lasted 50,000 miles or less. Look at it this way- Yes- US branded cars have improved a lot in the last 20 years. If you can recall back in the 80's, the difference between Japanese and American cars was embarrassingly huge. The engineering, quality, and reliability of Japanese cars was literally YEARS ahead of the American cars of that time period. It was this kind of competition that made US brand cars better and better. The difference between domestic and import brands is drastically more narrow.

If the US had not gotten this pressure, the quality would not be at the level that it is today. The same can be said for everything we buy. Sooner or later China will start selling cars here as well, at huge discounted prices- just like the Japanese did back in the 70's. It will start the cycle all over again and likely lead to even more innovation.

This is the benefit of having a free trade society. You as the consumer have the ability to choose from the best products. The product that sells well is either priced well or of better quality. Free market forces are probably the best way to get answers to what products are more reliable and better built.

Besides, most vehicles are composed of so many internationally sourced parts, that the only thing remaining of their national origin is the name. We are in an international economy where brands from every country are everywhere. Embrace it.

10:26:

You, sir, have made the most compelling, reasonable and well-founded statement in this whole discussion. I should know. I've been periodically involved in this thread since day one.

Good job. I think that's really all we need to know. Anything else anyone says would simply be glossing over a statement that brings this exhausted topic to a close.

10:26 Exactly. Toyota's sold cars for years, and at a higher sticker price than the Big 3, yet outsells them in the car market.

Common sense should be enough for anybody to figure out why. They make a better product.

GM and Ford cars are cheaper, that's a fact. If they were also BETTER, they would with no doubt outsell Toyota cars, but they don't. People are willing to pay more for a car that is built better and will last longer.

And their trucks are just as good. The U.S. truck market will be a tough nut to crack, only because people have been in the habit of buying trucks from the Big 3 for decades, whether they were good or bad, but just as Americans got tired of buying junk cars from the big 3, the same will likely happen with the truck market in years to come.

10:26.

Your argument is articulately stated, but that is about all it has going for it. Much of it is just your opinion, and what few facts you present are incorrect.

You assert (sarcastically I might add) “If you can recall back in the 80's, the difference between Japanese and American Cars was embarrassingly huge... the engineering, quality, and reliability of Japanese cars was literally YEARS ahead of the American cars of that time period”. That is just not true. I recall the 1980's quite well, as well as before then, except I was paying attention during that time. You seem not to have been. It was the American vehicles, particularly from GM, that were technologically years ahead of Toyota.

While Toyota was still using carburetors and vacuum lines on many of their models into 1990's, GM had utilized fuel injection since the 70's and was making major advances in electronic vehicle controls throughout the 1980's. GM was the first automaker to feature an integrated Body and Engine Computer Module in a worldwide production car. GM capitalized heavily from the multitude of engineering expertise they had from their ownership of Hughes Electronics, makers of cutting-edge communications and spy satellites.

But GM were not just orders of magnitude ahead of Toyota in the 80's only in the area of engine controls, but also in the area anti-lock braking, traction control, and vehicle stability control systems. In 1984, GM introduced the world’s first electrically driven, fuel-saving, integral power brake system for cars and light trucks; in 1989, Cadillac won Technology Innovation of the Year for its traction control system, to name just a few examples. This was after inventing the catalytic converter, and being the first automaker to offer airbags in the 70's.

What kinds of innovations were coming out of Toyota at that time? Can you name one major innovation of the Japanese auto manufacturers in the 1980's, or a specific aspect of how Japanese vehicles were more advanced? You made the blanket statement that there was supposedly an “embarrassingly huge” technological difference between the American and Japanese vehicles, so I would think you should surely be able to give some examples...

Of course, I can hear the usual retorts from the Toyota crowd coming already. So many people seem biased on the notion of Toyota's being supposedly so advanced, on the fact that they use overhead camshafts, while some American vehicles use/used pushrods. Yet, the overhead cam was invented decades before the pushrod engine, so that argument is moot. Regarding the utility of the pushrod engine, Al Unser Jr. won the Indianapolis 500 with a pushrod engine in 1994, while everyone else were utilizing overhead cams.

Referring back to the 80's, in 1986, Cadillac's new Seville platform with engine advanced engine/transmission control system design achieved an astonishing (for the time) close to 30 MPG on a large vehicle, with a pushrod V8. The current 400+ HP Corvette achieves almost 30 MPG on a pushrod engine, and is the only performance car in its class not to incur a gas guzzler tax. As far as the rest of the GM lineup is concerned, GM has more vehicle models than any other manufacturer that achieve in excess of 30 MPG, including V6 models.

As far as American vehicles being reliable is concerned, there are plenty of examples of happy owners on this site who have achieved high trouble free mileage with the domestics. The Toyota crowd simply chooses to just not admit it. I cannot waste my time trying to convince people who simply refuse to listen to facts, and would rather buy trouble prone vehicles to the detriment of their country's economy, than admit they are wrong. That is so sad.

You mention the Isuzu lawsuit against Consumer Reports as supposed proof that Consumer Reports is not biased. That lawsuit was over a report that the Isuzu Trooper was prone to rollover. I remember the initial report and subsequent lawsuit very well, as I watched both very closely as the events were unfolding. Believe it or not, I had a subscription to Consumer Reports at that time (as you can imagine, I have not any more). Your bringing the lawsuit up does absolutely nothing to prove that Consumer Reports is not biased, as the Trooper's determined propensity to rollover was a qualitative test result, wherein the Trooper was driven hard into a corner, and the wheel lifted. There was nothing subjective about it. The wheel either lifted, or it did not.

Where the bias takes place at Consumer Reports is in their “predicted” reliability, and how they word things in their articles. They will write an article about an American vehicle, and say something to the effect like, "the vehicle is good, but not up to the standards of the best from Japan." Yet, will they ever write an article saying a foreign vehicle is not up to the standards of the best from America?

By Consumer Reports' own admission now, Toyota quality has dramatically slipped, and several models from Ford are more reliable. I would have course to argue that there are a lot more models from a lot more brands than they are mentioning. But Toyota quality has been slipping for a long time. Consumer Reports either chose just to not report it, or they could not see beyond their own bias to recognize it was going on. In either case, the public was duped. Now the problem is the people that were duped (the Toyota fans) just do not want to admit it.

Now, as far as really being duped is concerned, you say we should all “embrace” free trade. What aspect of it do you want me to embrace, that Europe rebates their value added tax on goods produced to be exported to the United States, but imposes the tax on all imports coming in? I'd say that is somewhat of an unfair, or un-FREE trade practice, wouldn't you?

How about Asian countries undervaluing their currency so as to bring down the American economy by giving their exports a huge advantage in the market, at the cost of intentionally causing inflation for their own populations? China, whom you obviously cannot wait to have send their cars to the U.S., is notorious for this. By the way, I doubt we are going to see much (if any) innovation coming out of China, contrary to your expectations, but I would expect dramatically under-valued prices, designed to continue to bring about the destruction of our auto industry.

Of course, countries engaging in these tactics would be the first to complain if the U.S. ever did anything such as this to (God forbid) look out for IT'S own interests, as would the “freetraders,” who do not want to take an objective look at anything that is actually going on, because they might have to admit their whole way of thinking is interminably flawed.

Goods produced in the U.S. have legacy costs built into them such as pension, health insurance, etc. Now, whether those costs are too high and need to be looked at, is a whole other argument. But, the legacy expenses are all benefits which lead to a higher standard of living for American workers than most of our competitors, many of whom (now thanks to the dogma of “free trade"), are third world countries.

Would you like us all to start assuming third world standards of living in order to be competitive, or would it just be easier to actually implement policies that enable us to look out for our interests, maintain our standard of living, AND be competitive? Other countries do it, why not us?

There is a lot more at play than just how one product stacks up against another, which determines whether it will survive in the so-called “free” market. “Free-traders” just throw that out as an excuse, to try and explain why the country is falling apart since implementing their policies. We tried it your way and went from trade surpluses, being the most self sufficient nation in history with the best-paid workers on Earth, to now having a 59 billion dollar trade deficit, and millions of people losing their jobs every year as companies move out of the country to take advantage of third world wages, to be able to send their products back tax free to the same people they put out of a job, thanks to “free traders” paving the way.

The politics/policies you are preaching have been a dismal failure, and will be the downfall of our country in short order if we continue with them. Therefore, I most certainly will not “embrace them.”

********************

Steven@carsurvey.org.

********************

In reply to 3rd Nov 2007, 21:12.

I don't normally comment on these discussions, but as I have some practical experience with value added tax (VAT), I want to clarify your comments.

Warning to unsuspecting readers, a brief description of EU tax policy follows. Stop now if you are easily bored.

CSDO Media (the publisher of Carsurvey.org) is a UK VAT registered company, which has clients in both the EU and the USA, and makes business purchases in both the EU and the USA, so I'm familiar with transactions in both directions.

UK VAT (and I assume other EU VAT), applies to products and services purchased by consumers, regardless of their origin. It doesn't apply to business purchases. It's basically a consumer sales tax.

A widget produced in the UK, and a widget produced in the USA, are both liable to the same UK VAT at the point of sale.

In fact businesses outside the EU benefit from a small items exemption for personal imports, which makes it cheaper to buy DVDs etc from the USA, as you can legally pay less tax on some personal imports.

However, as with many regions (including the USA), there are import duties to the EU for certain products, which do increase the prices of imports, without affecting domestically produced products. These duties may be a cause for concern, but VAT itself shouldn't impact free trade.

Steven Jackson, CSDO Media Limited.

21:12, Sorry buddy, but your argument starts off on the wrong foot completely. The Big 3 made pure scrap in the 80's.

And I don't have any clue where you come up with your ideas about the domestics then being more technologically advanced, because they weren't and still aren't.

Toyota and Honda are responsible for just about every significant development in automobiles for the last 20 or 30 years. I didn't say ALL of them, but certainly most of them.

'Domestic' engines were complete junk. Remember the 70's and 80's, before the imports really started selling big over here? 100,000 miles used to seem like a lot when and if your old Cavalier or Escort made it that far without needing an engine.

Honda came into the picture at about that time with the little CRX and so forth, and all of the sudden people had a car that didn't rattle over every bump and would get double the gas mileage and three times as many miles before it finally died. Americans were not concerned with gas mileage or oil consumption at that time, but I think it's clear what that ignorance has done to us.

Who was, and is, thinking ahead in that respect? Toyota and Honda, or the Big 3? Who was producing more advanced, more efficient, and higher quality engines? You can't possibly answer 'The Big 3' and expect to be taken seriously on that point. Only now do the Big 3 begin to finally offer the kind of fuel efficient cars that Toyota and Honda offered 30 years ago. Too little, and much too late. Only now are they finally concerned (a little more) about making cars that aren't complete junk.

GM hastily tossing together a car like the Aveo to try and compete won't save them now. They've been skirting the issues for too long. They're worried about cosmetic fixes like Onstar and other things that they can use just to sell more cars, when they should have been long ago doing serious research and redesigns on their engines and drivetrains in order to take a stab at competing with Toyota and Honda in an effective way, instead of just worrying about making them comfortable with lots of buttons on the dashboard for people to push.

I just picked up the new Consumer Reports and read it. Ford is number 13 but people on here think that is better than fifth place Toyota. Not to mention that cars like the Yaris are practically 99% reliable.

As for the Fusion... which seems to be Ford's only car that is reliable... let's clarify something that the older folks seem to skip over since their eyes are not as strong as mine. The only Fusion that is more reliable than an Accord or Camry, or any other mid size car is the AWD V6 Fusion. What; they built 3 of them? The regular V6 and the Inline 4 rate much lower than this, putting them lower than the Accord and Camry (not Camry V6). Maybe Toyota is having problems in 2007 and 2008, but I am willing to bet they will once again triumph in 2010.

As for the comment before about the Japanese being far behind in technology; that is not why the Japanese came to be. The first Japanese cars were for practical purposes and fuel efficiency. To compare a Cadillac to a Toyota or Honda is very wrong.

The way to compare them is like this: the interior quality, just overall build quality of American cars was very shoddy during the time that such cars as the Accord, Camry, Civic, or Corolla came to be. Plain and simple; the engineers of these cars never slept and therefore they were knock on wood. To say they were junk and poorly built cars is an insult to the Japanese who spent long hours working on their cars while the American auto industry fell asleep at the wheel.

In my opinion, the innovation of the Japanese car was quality at every level, whether it was your Civic or your Lexus LS. You could easily order conveniences such as an LX Accord with every feature...didn't have to deal with ordering stupid packages, etc. I could go on and on... but people always miss the point and say that their Cimmaron was better than a Lexus, so I will just shake my head at you.

I think 21:12 is about the best comment I have read in this discussion, congrats.

And for you people who keep citing Consumer Reports for proof that Toyota is far more reliable than the big 3, read this:

http://www.autospies.com/news/Buick-Equals-Lexus-in-Latest-JD-Power-Dependability-Study-18772/

Apparently Buick equals Lexus in reliability, imagine that! Following those two are Cadillac, Mercury and Honda. Nowhere in the top five is the Toyota brand mentioned. I know Toyota makes Lexus, but GM also makes Buick so that argument means nothing. You can keep using Consumer Reports for your claims about Toyota, but then I'm sure you won't mind if we cite JD powers.

I wrote the comment of 21:12, which many of you do not seem to like. I stand by every word of it. I appreciate Steven taking the time to respond at 6:28, and share his local knowledge.

I do not dispute anything Steven said, including the VAT being added to all goods at the point of sale. What I was referring to in my comments, though, is that in countries that have the VAT, when a manufacturer exports a product, they get a rebate equal to the value-added tax rate (VAT) on that exported good. This is intended to make it easier for the company to export the product, while the US (wrongly in my opinion) does not give its manufacturers any such benefit. I do not have a problem with Europe's VAT, or the way Europe choses to conduct its trade. I think the US should implement similar policies on both counts, with a VAT replacing our income tax, which we did fine for 137 years without.

I ask the “free traders,” why can't countries be free to implement whatever policies they want, and let the cards fall where they may? If a nation implements unreasonable trade policies, nobody will want to trade with them, and they will suffer by their own accord. But, if a country choses to implement favorable trade policies, then other nations will want to trade with them. What is so “un-free” about that?

The only people who want to take away freedom, are the “free traders,” as they have conveniently named themselves. They want to erase all borders, take away everyone's national sovereignty, and dictate a unilateral one size fits all policy for the world. If we need to make a decision, the “free traders” would not have us go our elected officials in our own country, but instead to the WTO, where we are just a vote, in a group who may or may not be friendly toward us at any given moment. We cannot adapt to any new situation which comes our way, such as our factories shutting down because we cannot compete with third world wages, because we have to maintain the tunnel vision of free trade at any cost.

Didn't our founding fathers warn us against getting into entangling alliances? How about the constitution? Should we still pay attention to that? Maybe we should just take our marching orders from the UN next. I support the free market, which to me means ALL countries should to be free to make their OWN economic and other decisions, to their own benefit or detriment.

“Free trade” is just another one of those things where if you do not support it, you are instantly labeled as an “isolationist,” much like you are labeled with any number of other catch phrases attacking your patriotism or standing as a capitalist, if you do not fall into line support other pillars of the neo-conservative globalist agenda, which would not be appropriate for me to mention here.

I just look at the record of failure of the policies they are defending, and that is reason enough for me not to go along with them. But those failures mean nothing to the people supporting the agenda. They just rationalize them away, saying things such as the products are not good enough, and/or other talking points designed to save face with anybody gullible enough to buy it, when it is so much more of a multi-faceted problem than that.

The last several comments are about cars... how about focusing on new full size trucks? I encourage everyone in the market for a new full size truck to simply test drive 3 or 4 different models and then buy based on that. 2 imports and 2 domestics...

I chose the new Silverado after personally doing so. I feel it rides and handles the best and has the 100,000 mile warranty. Straight line performance maybe the Tundra, but I like handling much more than 1/4 mile straight line driving.

I owned new cars in the 80-90's myself as well. What relevance that has when you are out shopping for a new full size truck? It seems a bit removed trapped far in the past. If you drive 25,000 miles plus a year as I do, you may want the nicer standard warranty without aftermarket addons and high deductibles. But again in my opinion driving is the biggest factor unless you want to park and read consumer magazines, which will never replace testing each vehicle personally.

I am a tall driver and once ordered a new vehicle with a sunroof option which reduced my headroom in bad weather, and no amount of seat adjustments could resolve the problem, so I learned a valuable lesson about test drives with all options in place before... vs. blindly ordering especially from magazines no less.

Did he just try and deny 21:12's statements? This is exactly what the problem is with Toyota lovers. "gee hmmm, these are some pretty interesting facts, something I didn't know and don't like so, THEY'RE JUNK!"

NAME those technological advancements you say Toyota and Honda are responsible. NAME THEM. NAME THEM NAME THEM NAME THEM.

I thought so, you CAN'T.

Where is your proof to back up your accusations towards 21:12?

As I have researched, everything in that comment is purely factual and well-obtained. However, what you say is flat out wrong. There is no proof to back up what you say. None.

I'm rather shocked that you can simply say domestics from the 80's are scrap. Well, I have a little personal story to tell you.

It goes, there once was a man named Tom, who owned many Chevrolets throughout his life time. None of them gave him a hassle, none of them failed to start. However it came to be that one day, his friend Jerry decided to say, "gee Tom, your Chevys suck, why don't you buy something new for a change!" Tom replied, "but why would I want to do that, I've had no problems here!" Jerry simply said, "well I can guarantee that if you buy a Toyota, you'll be glad you made the change!" Tom thought about this for a while, and decided to take the plunge. Out goes a huge chunk of change, and in comes the shiny new Toyota! He was impressed of course, being its new, but his hopes began to fade away, as the Toyota brakes prematurely blew. Then came just about everything imaginable, from suspension components to even the driver's door handle! He asked Jerry, "why, oh why, have you put me through such misery. I've worked and worked to own a truck that works. I'm sorry to say, despite what the critics say, that I will not own this truck another day." Jerry hung his head low and meandered back to his home, where his Toyota happily awaits, waiting for the next trip to town.

You see, this is a personal experience (in story form) of MY experience with Tundras.

I think you are the one who should be re-evaluating your credibility at the moment. Perhaps it is you who are the one posting things, thought most would never take you serious?

********************

steven@carsurvey.org

********************

In reply to 4th Nov 2007, 18:21.

I'm pretty sure that when exporting goods outside the EU, there's no rebate of VAT. It's just the case that VAT is not applicable. The same is true of sales tax going in the other direction (at least with all the state sales taxes I've encountered).

VAT rebates only happen for business to business (not consumer) transactions WITHIN the EU (you pay the VAT, but then claim it back later on). Transactions outside the EU actually involve less paperwork, as there's no need to claim back VAT, as it was never paid in the first place.

If CSDO Media (a UK company) provides an entity in the US with a product or service, there is no VAT to pay, but there is no rebate either.

When CSDO Media pays for its web hosting in Texas, no Texas Sales Tax is charged by the web hosting company.

So in my experience, exporters in both directions have level playing field regarding sales tax and VAT.

Steven Jackson, CSDO Media Limited.

Hmmmmm... just driving a Honda you can tell that there are many things that GM was lacking. I will not get into them now, but just stating that the Japanese did not bring anything innovative is just another blind eye to this whole subject. For all you guys know, the Japanese cars never existed and you just went on driving your Chevettes and your S-10's.

Round and round we go again...

Listen, nobody is going to label anybody who prefers to buy Domestic brand goods at any cost or sacrifice in quality an "isolationist" But at the same time, I find it blatantly wrong to claim that free trade doesn't work.

In fact, the US economy has had the highest degree of success internationally over any other country over the past 100 years. This even includes bad years during recessions and depressions. Most of this success came post WW2 when the US became increasingly supportive of free trade. The problem is that there are many people who are still living in the stone age, and who firmly still support this happy image of the US worker, toiling away on the ole' assembly line punching together cars, radios, TV sets, and so on.

The US is much less a manufacturing country and more a country that embraces intellectual property development. Most of what we do now is engineer and develop. Even if you were to buy a GM or Ford product, it just like most other manufactured goods are composed of a myriad of internationally sourced parts. The Chevy Equinox for example has an entire engine shipped from China. The much-touted Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan are made in Mexico. And so on.

So if you're not helping George on the assembly line in Arkansas, then who are you helping? Upper executives? Well be their guest. Here's the irony: even if you don't support free trade and think buying a Ford is going to solve that problem, then you're supporting it anyway because every single item you buy today - whether it be a pair of socks or a domestic brand car, is supported by the principal of free trade.

Secondly, we're heading into a new era where platforms, technology, ideas, engineering, and manufacturing facilities are being shared in an open-source manner, similar to the way open source software works. This is one step further where companies that might actually be competitors can share information with each other for mutual benefit. I see this as an incredible positive. If we were to remain staunchly domestic, then none of this would be possible and instead American companies would ultimately lose.

In regards to US cars from the 80's... I will agree that technological advances were made. Motorola was the first on-board computer management system for cars. Domestic carmakers embraced safety, emission, and engine management technology fairly aggressively in the 80's. But if the cars you put the technology in fall apart, then this could hardly be called superior. Cadillac's Northstar engines were a disaster. Ford tried to make a modern car - the Taurus - only to have created another total piece of junk. My mom had an 85' Camry that had electronic fuel injection, ABS, and a whole slew of gadgets that for even then made even some of the loaded caddys seem antiquated.

As far as trucks, well I wouldn't say that even now GM can produce anything worth buying. Heck- just read this review for a 2007 Silverado:

http://www.carsurvey.org/review_103794.html

OK... so tell me how the Silverado is a better truck than the Tundra?

Anyhow, I'm sure a whole slew of misinformation is going to be heading this way as soon as this is posted.