2007 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - All Comments

17:40,

Watch the "truth about trucks" video.

They test all the trucks on a flex-course. The tundra did the worse. The whole frame was flexing, the tailpipes were slapping against the bed, the fuel door was flying open, etc. The F-150, because of its THICKER AND STRONGER FULLY BOXED FRAME, did the best, 10x better than the Tundra with its weak c-channel frame. There was little movement. The trucks that did the WORSE were trucks with C-channel frames, like the Tundra.

My point is, that a fully boxed frame is flat out stronger than any C-channel can ever be. My comments were about frames, not bridges that are made of mostly concrete.

Sorry to disappoint you, however, I had an S-10 that made it to 496,000 miles before I got rid of it. And it was still running fine. Read the review.

Hey everyone, we might as well stop trying to convince this one guy that keeps bragging about his Toyota. Obviously, even with all of the vast differences in weight, metal, rigidity, not to mention aluminum engine vs. cast iron, lack of any real abuse to brag about besides spinning tires in mud instead of real work, and the front end crumpling like a pop can in any minor wreck, if he can't acknowledge these differences, that's his problem.

Toyota needs to change their slogan from "moving forwards" to the Charmin toilet paper slogan, "less is more". Because somehow Toyota has managed to violate both the laws of physics, and logic by convincing people that quality is to have less metal and yet pay more for it.

At least we're not that naive. I actually get down and look underneath these vehicles and compare one to the other. There is no opinionated rants when the metal in the domestics is indeed more from frame, to suspension, to engine.

There is no opinion about thin metal. Thin metal is thin metal whether you says its thin or not. No one's opinion is going to change this. Your Toyota is physically a weaker truck. I like to think of it as the skinny kid on the football team that looks as big as the other team members because of the shoulder pads. The illusion of the sheet metal makes the truck look pretty much the same compared to the others, but underneath it all, it simply isn't there.

13:34 there is no way you can mot have trucks at construction sites. I work on these sites. If you were in this field you would realize that fact. I could tag my backhoe and drive it to work perhaps.

To think that 90% of the road construction crews I have seen must have transformer vehicles. When I drive by all I see is like 4000 car and like 1/5 of that are trucks. You really need a truck when the state is providing a bob cat or a crane to reconstruct road, right? I mean if you hitched it on your truck and left the site wouldn't that be stealing tax payers stuff? hmmm.

We who own Toyota trucks do not need to be convinced of anything. We already know that the trucks we drive are highly reliable, competent, and will last us for many, many years of trouble-free use. If you who keep on coming in here and trying to make a case as to why dinosaur clunker Fords and Chevys are so much better than Toyotas, then I think that in reality, you all are just trying to convince yourselves that you don't in fact own dilapidated crap spewed out of rust belt states.

I've lived in both "good-ole-boy-land" with people who think that they uphold the "American value system" and therefor think that it's a sin to buy anything with a foreign nameplate even if that means buying an inferior product, as well as the total opposite in highly urban progressive areas where people think Fords and Chevys are kind of like jokes. Neither is correct for assuming so, and luckily for you and I, we can have the choice to freely choose what we want to buy.

That said, I stand behind what I know to be true, which is that my truck and practically everyone else I know who owns a Toyota truck has had near-flawless performance and reliability and simply expect them to run day in, day out without a hicup. Enough said.

23:48 OK, we'll use a football analogy if you like. I like to think of Ford as the fat kid on the team that thinks that just adding more weight everywhere will make him tougher and perform better. Simply not true. Once again, you completely miss the point. So I'll try again. Toyota DESIGN! DESIGN!...The way the frame is shaped and bolted together, is superior to any other truck it's size. I've seen your theories about weight=strength disproven dozens of times off road, where anything else will flex and fall apart before a Toyota will. You obviously don't have enough knowledge about this subject to discuss it. One more time; more material does NOT mean more strength. If it's shaped correctly, maybe so; but the people at Ford and GM have not yet done this. A Toyota will stay tight long after an S-10 has twisted apart. Oh, and an S-10 with 496,000 miles on it? Yeah, sure.

"The way the frame is shaped and bolted together, is superior to any other truck it's size."

Prove it.

How can

(

be stronger than

()?

(Best I could do for example on this website)

Also, I am commenter 23:48, not 23:32.

Why skimp... its not a small compact having to appeal to the masses mpg woes. These trucks fully equipped are not cheap. I'll take rugged, strength, payloads and great tow capabilities first and then the superior warranty to back it up. That means 3/4 ton pickups if I am buying a truck and insuring it and what is behind it......I am not taking the risk.

11:05 Well, I'd like to thank the many thousands of people on Car Survey for steering me away from any Ford, GM, or Dodge product. I realized that they are all junk, and made the smart decision and bought a Toyota, which is a much better product than those 3 will ever hope to make. Glad I read here first and didn't waste my money on garbage.

I think some of you who keep throwing the " cast iron and heavy weight is better" argument need to carefully read the comments from 05:43. That person mentioned he worked at a lab in Oak Ridge, TN. I actually grew up not too far from there. That area is heavily involved with nuclear, robotic, and defense research. Now just sit and think about that for a minute. I think this person knows a tad more than the average joe about metallurgical properties. Why even continue the argument?

As I've said before... I haven't seen any cast iron planes flying around... have you?

Obviously you read all of the reviews on this site very selectively. There is a negative review of Toyota for every one of Chevrolet, Ford etc. Buy what you want. But quit making the claims that Toyota is best bar none. It is just not true.

I wish I knew of Car Survey when I purchased my last new import. I would have saved many thousands avoiding an Acura purchase... there are so many bad reviews which the dealership never disclosed. I have bought new GM's and have had the best 2 vehicles yet... and a better warranty. I also do not have to buy 93 octane fuel anymore.

11:03, Uh, NO. There are WAY more bad Ford and Chevy reviews on this site, and for sure in real life. Oh, and actually, it IS true. Toyota's ARE way better.

Oh no and Oh my, but domestics are better. Maybe when Toyota is around for 50 or more years we will see the true effect of time. Lets see the same new vehicle warranty and perhaps I might forgive my last import mistakes.

23:11 Well, just because it takes GM and Ford 75 years for the idea to occur to them that quality matters, doesn't mean the case is the same for Toyota. They've known this since day 1, which is why people began to abandon domestic cars years ago, and have been buying Toyota's instead.

Look at the numbers. Think of it like grading homework. Ford has moved up to about a C- from a solid F. GM still gets an F. Complete lack of effort. Toyota gets an A. Honda gets an A. Dodge gets an incomplete for not being able to decide what country they should be owned by and nearly going out of business 3 times in the last 30 years.