2002 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - All Comments

21:37 I watched Barrett Jackson last night, and I did not see any lines of Toyotas that are now worth many times their original selling price.

An opinion is an opinion; I feel new domestics are superior based on first hand late model ownership. Also there are those successful and younger than 50 buying. My son bought his Viper at age 30. My money went into his education; an even better investment.

"I'm from a younger generation who grew up with Japanese cars."

Too bad. You missed experiencing what a real car is like.

"All of the back and forth banter means nothing. Toyota makes better cars and trucks than Ford, Chevy, or Dodge ever has. That's the point. If you don't like it, too bad."

Don't you just LOVE these objective, fact-filled comments?? So much data to support the argument and so much valid documentation. Why, with all this rock-solid "proof" I'm almost persuaded to run out and buy one of those perfect Tundras to pull my 60-foot sailboat!!

I actually disagree that Barrett Jackson cars are overpriced. Take a close look at the high level of restoration and then add all the related restoration costs to achieve that level. It's a lot of hard work and attention to detail.

I have driven inexpensive drivers, and they are what they are. Driving a car full of Bondo, needing paint, re-chroming, cut up dash, bad floor pans and trunk it was a real wake up call starting over. Unless you are truly in love with a car, condition is a real factor. The day you sell with hundreds of personal hours involved tearing down, replacing, driving hours to attain a single hard to find part, it starts making sense to buy the nicest car you can afford instead.

I have seen a lot of Barrett Jackson cars that $40,000 may cover the restoration cost, and then you look at the price less the commission for a turn key vehicle. I also feel it makes much more sense to buy vehicles that have broader appeal if you ever want to sell. Then you can have a stronger possibility of regaining all the time and hard work involved.

I do not get any kind of adrenaline rush with any current Toyota model, including their trucks. It's nice having reliability, but then not drop the ball with features, function and capability that full size domestic trucks offer.

The random edict imports are better is not accurate as to what I have tested and experienced lately. And I buy not armchair comment or lament on vehicles acquired long ago. It's 2008, and now 2009 models exist. I find domestic full size pickups far superior today.

"Don't you just LOVE these objective, fact-filled comments?? So much data to support the argument and so much valid documentation."

It's actually quiet easy to find facts that support these claims: Just about any consumer or industry quality reports, and no - we're not talking "initial" quality either, but rather how long a car lasts 5,10,15 years. Hands down, Honda, Toyota, and their luxury divisions are a higher quality. They might also be your only choice sooner or later because both GM and Ford are on life support.

Lastly, yes indeed I grew up with Japanese cars. The argument that they aren't exciting doesn't make sense considering that some of the "collector" cars now are cars like Chevy Novas. These were bland, pedestrian, bare-bones cars back in the day. But guess what? A lot of you drove them back when you were young, and therefore you like them and will pay lots of money for them. The same goes for people like me. Things change. Tastes change.

In regards to old cars and values, there's something to be said about a man with a family who spends $40,000 and $50,000 of the family's money restoring an old car. I can't tell you how many guys I knew where the family was barely making it, yet good ole' dad was spending all of his free time fixing up some old car.

I myself happen to own a 55' Mercury. Yes, it isn't perfect, has some bondo here and there, has the original interior, and drives fine. But it gets just as much attention at the shows as some of those cars someone spent 100,000 restoring. People in many cases actually like to see wear and tear and not some absolutely perfect, slick, flawless car. There's 100's of them anyway, so once you see one 55 Belair, 65 Mustang, 68 Camero, or yet another Ford couple with a flathead... you've pretty much seen it all.

Again - car shows are increasingly becoming boring since everyone restores the same cars and in most cases do so with poor taste, using weird colors and custom touches essentially destroying the car's original beauty. Can't tell you how many ugly pink hot rods I see these days. ugh..

I agree about spending family money wisely. With the downturn in the housing market, stocks etc. I am glad I sold our former oversized home 2 years ago and took the profit and just paid off our current smaller home. I still have room and a big garage. If I held the other home til now I would have to take a hit or not be able to see it. And I would rather buy cars now.

And if you focus on popular restored classic muscle cars (the ones with appeal), I see it as a sounder investment today. They will dip at times, but still are climbing in value.

I prefer GM, but like most restored domestic classics. My oldest son wisely started with classic Mustangs. He owned 3 Mustangs in a row and now owns a Viper. The last 1966 he changed to a 95 GT drivetrain and added retro A/C. From the outside it looked pure stock. The others were "restified" meaning they can be quickly returned to original form.

Choosing a car like an early Mustang is smart. It is the most important production car of all time ever developed. This makes it have broader appeal and easy to have a valuable vehicle. And to sell easily.

I am not seeing any great Toyota cars or trucks with the appeal of any of the high production classics. What's an old Corolla or Camry worth today? The secondary car lots are full of some pretty sad examples. I see them as basic transportation only. The horrors I see are the winged ones with the f... pipe with bad rings and torched springs, mainly Civics with all the racing stickers down the sides. I rather see a modified pink one in nice shape than old rusty examples.

"Hands down, Honda, Toyota, and their luxury divisions are a higher quality."

Come one, I think you need to challenge your preconceived notions. Toyota is experiencing severe quality problems, including widespread instances of complete engine failures at low mileages. Aside from me personally witnessing and being financially damaged by such disasters, they are also documented on Consumer Affairs:

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/toyota_engine.html

I do not think that makes Toyota the standard-bearer for quality.

Moreover, the absolute primary reason cars have "evolved" to the way they are today (i.e., front wheel drive unit body configuration) is for one reason: to make them easier and less expensive to manufacture. All manufacturers have to do is stamp out a body, put a suspension, stuff a transversely oriented engine under the hood in any convoluted way they can get it, and link its power to the road through an incredibly fragile and physically non-sensible driveline configuration.

Why do you think car manufacturers (including Japanese companies) are returning many of their models to rear wheel drive? Many people who grew up with RWD dislike FWD for good reason. For example, they are tired of constantly replacing drive axles, and bloodying up up knuckles during (or paying outrageous prices for) even the slightest repair or maintenance procedure. Have you ever replaced a transmission or clutch on a FWD? It is not pretty, nor is the repair bill that results.

I agree vehicles should evolve, and will even admit that the Japanese vehicles generally shifted the automotive tide in a direction it needed to go in when they were introduced. However, vehicle "evolution" should be tailored toward what is best for the consumer, not the manufacturer. I do not think that is what has occurred.

Comment 12:46 is an example of an informed and accurate comment based on fact and citing credible data. As a mechanic I totally agree about the front drive issue. It is simply cheaper for the manufacturer, and the arguments about better handling and better traction, etc. are pure ad hype to sell uninformed drivers on a system basically designed to make more money for car makers by cutting costs, and making the cars so difficult to work on that people HAD to take them to the dealer and pay $800 to have a $50 water pump installed.

We currently own one domestic front drive car, one rear drive domestic sports car, and a mid-sized rear drive domestic SUV. If we get a snow or ice storm, the front drive car stays in the driveway, as it has way less traction and handles MUCH worse than the rear drive SUV.

Due to the extreme repair cost and difficulty in working on them, I'd never own a Japanese front-drive vehicle of any kind. They require more maintenance and generally break down much more often than domestic vehicles. The one front-drive we have is a GM, and in typical GM fashion has never required a single repair in 8 years.

"For example, they are tired of constantly replacing drive axles"

This may be true for most imports. The CV joints in our Honda were clattering at only 40,000 miles. However this has NOT been the case with our domestics. My last Dodge went over 240,000 miles without CV joints are half-shafts (or anything else, for that matter). Our current front-drive GM is going on 9 years old and has never had a CV joint or half-shaft problem. Everything on it is still original except the tires, battery and brakes.

You know, if you tell yourself something over and over again, such as trying to convince others that somehow, GM and Ford make better cars than Toyota or Honda, you start believing it yourself.

Again, the overall conclusion based on the grand total of available quality comparisons via publications, reports, and studies show Toyota and Honda outperforming the big three, and usually by large margins.

This argument is like the current presidential election: Even though one side chooses a woman who doesn't even know who the PM of Canada is and utilizes the same politics of the worst administration in US history, somehow roughly 45% of the US STILL thinks it's a good idea to elect them. Thank God this time they won't win.

But the same is with cars. Nevermind that GM and Ford have been pouring out garbage from their factories for years, have cut every corner possible, shipped massive amounts of labor overseas, and now even imports a lot of their engines from China, people still refuse to admit to the truth that yes - Honda and Toyota make a superior product, hands down, end of argument.

10:33.

Bad analogy (politics). We are trying to have a discussion (albeit spirited) about cars here.

If you want to add anything constructive, maybe you can explain why Toyota engines are failing in mass quantities:

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/toyota_engine.html

I still have not seen a Toyota fan address this.

"http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/toyota_engine.html.

I still have not seen a Toyota fan address this."

I'll address it for you. Yes - cars have problems. All brands, all models, and all years regardless of what the overall quality reports might say. But what you're suggesting above isn't proof of anything. If you look on the same site you're using to make your case, just click on the General Motors section and select just one of their cars. Here's the thread for the Chevy Malibu for example:

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/gm_chev_malibu.html

On that page alone, there's over 100 entries.

What about the Chevy Impala?

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/gm_chev_malibu.html

Again - well over 100 entries.

Now... what about the Avalon?

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/toyota_avalon.html

2 complaints. That's right, not 100, not 20, or even 10, but TWO. The difference between the complaints racked up against GM versus Toyota is inline with what I've mentioned above, which is that all in all, Toyota quality is generally better than GM and Ford. I even read on that site that one reader had claimed that the site was "unfair" to GM. Ironic since the material was written by actual GM owners and not journalists.

Sure - cars have problems. The key is which cars in general have LESS problems. The answer is clearly easy to see even using the site you mentioned above.

08:43 Well, Toyota engines aren't, and have never, failed in mass quantities. That's your phrase and it's your opinion. Nothing more. And there's your answer. They leave that kind of poor design and build to Ford and GM.

The sad thing is, Ford and GM's crappy drivetrains are the least of their troubles. I'm dating a paralegal; I won't say who or where obviously, who has handled the workload for HUNDREDS of cases against Ford, personally.. for vehicles bursting into flames while in the garage, hours after being driven, for example. I could go on and on, spark plugs blowing right out of badly machined heads, causing fires, brake and seatbelt related accidents. All of this is FACT. Google anything I just mentioned and put "Ford" behind it; you will see the proof as well as a mountain of other Ford and GM's embarrassing safety and quality oversights.

I don't expect you diehard domestic fans to understand why Toyota's and Honda's are better vehicles. If you did understand, you wouldn't be driving Fords and Chevy's. The only reason to own one is by default; if you need something that can tow the load an F-350 can, because the imports wisely didn't enter that market.

Wonder why Ford/GM/Dodge trucks are sitting on the lots for several months or a year at a time? Why those three are all in serious trouble? Toyota and Honda invested where the market is. Passenger cars, light to full size trucks, vans..etc. Granted, the F-350 isn't a bad truck. But as for anything smaller, ANY car or light truck, Toyota and Honda outclassed them decades ago and continue to today, by a large margin.

To 08:43. Sorry, but you will NEVER see an import fan provide any DOCUMENTED or VERIFIABLE data proving that imports are better. I've offered this challenge so many times I have Carpal-tunnel syndrome from typing so much.

I'm a senior citizen, mechanic and car enthusiast. I've driven, worked on and owned some of just about every moderately priced vehicle around. In all my years of car ownership (we usually own 3-4 at a time) we've owned German, Japanese and domestic vehicles. No import has EVER been as solidly reliable as ANY of our Ford, GM or Chrysler products.

We have put 300,000+ miles on a Ford with virtually zero problems, 240,000+ miles on a Dodge with similar results and 277,000+ miles on a Buick with NO problems of ANY kind.

I see comments from import owners who have probably never owned a domestic stating that "Ford engines blow up at 40,000 miles".

The daughter of a friend of ours bought a brand new Ford and drove it 56,000 miles without EVER OPENING THE HOOD!! She was totally ignorant of cars and her father had no idea she wasn't having it serviced. That it made 56,000 miles without oil changes or even checking any of the fluids (or requiring a battery) is a miracle in itself.

We had a neighbor who bought a new Corolla and had it serviced exactly as recommended. The engine seized at 30,000 miles and Toyota (at first) refused to fix it, claiming he HADN'T changed the oil. The man stuck lemon stickers on the car, rented a large truck (a FORD appropriately), and hauled the Corolla around with a large sign on it. The local newspaper ran a photo of it with the caption "Oh what a feeling to DRAG a Toyota". I heard later that after much bad publicity, the dealer agreed to a settlement.

We currently own an 8-year-old GM car, a 5-year-old GM SUV and a 1-year-old Ford. None of them has ever had a single problem. The 8-year-old GM has had tires, a battery, and brake pads (at 70,000 miles). The Ford, of course, is new, but in view of our past experience with Fords, I expect this one to outlive me. The ONLY cars we've had experience with that DIDN'T make 100,000 miles without massive problems were a Honda Civic and a Volkswagen.

As for Tundra, Toyota made a good decision to copy some of Ford's great design ideas on the newer, larger Tundra. Unfortunately, Toyota's "uncharacteristic lapse in quality" (as Consumer Reports put it) still plagues the Tundra, making it a bit of a risky buy for reliability.

The rock-solid Ford F-150 STILL remains the best selling vehicle on the planet after 3 DECADES, and likely will continue to hold that position unless knocked off by rising fuel prices. Unfounded statements declaring imports "superior" will doubtless continue to keep right on going and going... just like our domestic vehicles do.

I find first hand direct ownership as the most revealing. Sorry but imports have dropped significantly, and domestic full size trucks are better than ever. I had a 2004 Silverado; racked up 80,000 miles quickly, even towing a lot. No issues... tires, brakes and frequent fluid filter changes. So I bought more, but not without looking at both import and domestic new full size trucks. Still not impressed enough to switch... imagine buying a new vehicle ever few years and hating the actual driving, handling and capability. I hope we are not going back to the small truck/car comparisons again.

I also would like direct late model Toyota comments, addressing actual owner issues on consumeraffairs.com as well. Even better, look at features and benefits of domestic and import full size trucks by test driving them. By saying

you don't have to drive late model vehicles before basing an opinion is not how I approach and actually buy mine.