2002 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - All Comments

"This has become a car and light truck review it seems"

Yup and that's what the Toyota Tundra is -- a light truck (even if this thread has been hijacked). It was rated to tow somewhere between 6500-7200lbs and was designed to be a light half-ton pickup for folks who needed that. Do you need more? Buy something different. Toyota made no claim that this truck could do more.

"Only genuine frequency of repair records can do this. I'd like to see THOSE (but I know I won't) ".

Check out "Consumer Reports". That is what the name implies. It is a frequency of repair record. Please understand that their auto reviews aren't the same as their repair records. Their reviews are subjective; their data is a compilation of thousands of owners' experiences. I've even filled out their surveys a couple of times. They aren't very interested in what you FEEL about your vehicle. Mostly they just want to know what has broken on it.

"We're STILL waiting for you to cite some PROOF of this. Opinions based on 20-year-old domestics with 200,000 miles on them are not valid. Just WHERE are we to find this mythical "research"?? Please CITE SOURCES".

Again refer above. If your assertion becomes that somehow "Consumer Reports" has messed with the numbers, you may want to provide examples of the successful lawsuits that proved the same. Plus if you make that claim, you discredit the most reputable large-scale compiler of owner surveys in order to reinforce an over-small sample or prejudice.

Nevertheless there are some very good reasons to buy domestic. American manufacturers are better at muscle cars. They make the best off-roader (Wrangler). They make the best vehicles for trailering. Heavy-duty stuff is mostly American. Usually American vehicles come with a better warranty. They have amazing heritage. And, to top it off, American autos are getting MUCH better in every way quickly.

I used to own a Tundra. It was a very reliable truck. But it was a LIGHT truck designed for lighter loads and lighter pulling. It was no competitor for 3/4 and 1 ton pickups. Nor was it a competitor for a Jeep off-road. It was just a competent light-duty truck.

Finally it's funny that the anti-foreign crowd refers mostly to Asian manufacturers. Why? What about the Germans? They're foreign. I heard no complaints that the Dodge van is a Mercedes. Why not? All the same arguments apply. Patriotism is an issue either way. Why is it that 700 comments end up on Japanese vs. American threads but nothing comparable seems to exist elsewhere? There seems to be a double standard for "foreign". Just a friendly observation...

13:47 Thanks. Now I understand how a so-called domestic could win a reliability rating over other Toyota's. It IS one. I thought someone had made a huge mistake.

As a Toyota owner, I've been challenged to offer proof and have clearly done so. My case rests. Still waiting for something from the Ford and Chevy owners other than opinion and storys. Something tells me I'll have a LONG wait, since they know I'm right and can only offer opinion and personal preference, neither of which constitutes fact.

I have fun watching them try to make a case though. I guess I'm supposed to believe stories about their favorite Fords and ignore the expert opinion of every leading automotive publication out there... I do get a kick out of this.

18th Jan 2009, 15:59,

There were several posts that specifically listed various publications, reports, surveys, and reviews that ALL listed Japanese cars as generally better than those produced by Domestic automakers. Could you address this or simply keep stating that we have no "proof". The proof has been given. Several times.

Secondly, Japanese car manufactures are setup all over the Southeast where I live. They greatly benefit the local economy and the people's lives who work there. That the big Three exist in the rust belt where the economy is falling apart isn't very telling of how beneficial the big three have been. So not to sound cold, but so what. I could care less if the company is foreign or domestic. Either way, there are many in places like KY, TN, and AL who have good lives because of "foreign" companies.

Lastly, even if the big three survive, their product lineup is becoming increasingly off shored. Cars like the Vibe, Fusion, Aveo, Pontiac GTO, C6, Taurus, and many others have foreign underpinnings. Even some of the new Buick concepts were actually designed in China. In other words, the big Three have not exactly been good stewards in regards to keeping American jobs. This has been shown time and again, with plants built in Mexico, Canada, Brazil, and now even China and Korea. They're a business that must compete on a global scale, and with the high cost of union labor, that means progressively moving operations overseas. So even if you buy a brand-new Chevy with a Chevy badge, there's a good chance that it's actually more "import" than the imports made in KY. Think about that for a minute. Its certainly not the romantic image of the factory worker toiling in a Ohio plant.

Anyhow, I'm sure this argument will be never-ending. Oh well.

21:13 you have spent a tremendous amount of time on the Tundra thread... since you are sold on one, when are you going to purchase a new Tundra and join the proud ranks of full size truck ownership?

There has yet to be any application discussion coming forth just how you have interpreted others. I guess you do not have to own a specific type of category, however why devote so much time to a vehicle that you do not have an interest in acquiring? Anyone on here can run out and buy a magazine, but perhaps would like to be enlightened further by direct ownership daily issues, drivability etc. It adds a lot of credibility starting a comment " I have a owned a Tundra for the past couple of years and have found the following... Not what your next door neighbor has or a family member.

My mother has had new cars I have no clue about or have not even driven. I cannot write a valid summary on them as it's secondhand. I will spend more for a larger full size truck mainly because of the applications... am I solo on this? I somehow think that others buying at this point and time are doing the same. They need them. I suspect you have literature all about your arm chair..... I have a new full size truck in my driveway based on a list of criteria and road tests. I had to get out of the chair to do so and I decided and bought. Not a Tundra.

"So go ahead and tell me more stories about your Fords and Chevy's. It's entertaining to a Toyota owner, knowing that I drive the most reliable vehicle made"

Talk about irony. "most reliable"??? Even the highly biased car magazines that drool over ANYTHING foreign call the recent Toyotas an "uncharacteristic drop in quality". BEST?? By WHOSE STANDARDS.

Also, we ARE STILL WAITING for genuine, verifiable frequency of repair records from DEALERS, not some disgruntled owner who is upset that his cigarette lighter stopped working at 300,000 miles in his domestic, such as the commenter whose 200,000 mile Ford finally had a minor issue and he has now become a worshipper of anything foreign.

21:13 fact is when you have repeated engine, transmission issues in the import service dept and are handed bills to pay. My checkbook does not offer opinion just fact. Personal expense is the overall true factor when it's low mileage; due to the crappy warranty expiring, you just pay or sell it off.

21:13.

Still waiting for a Toyota fan (you?) to explain why if Toyota's are so reliable as, you claim, they are having constant engine failures:

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

Maybe you could also consider why all of these problems are not cited by the automotive publications you rely on so much. These problems are obviously going on; they are being reported to Consumer Affairs and indicated on reviews on this site in numerous reviews. Could it be that many automotive publications, much like many media outlets in general, are biased?

But, even while Consumer Reports had been writing accolades about Toyota for so long and perpetually placing them on their recommended list (EVEN WHILE ALL THESE TOYOTA ENGINE PROBLEMS WERE GOING ON), why is it now that they suddenly "rated" the Camry and Tundra as much worse than average in reliability and no longer recommend them. Is it possible that Consumer Reports could not cover for Toyota's horrible quality anymore, had to reluctantly give them a bad rating to try and save there already much precarious credibility, and then pretend that the problems only began recently?

You say all the testimonies of domestic owners who have had excellent experiences with their vehicles are irrelevant. So what is the point in arguing with you? You clearly do not want to listen to what anybody has to say. You would obviously rather listen to a handful of biased automotive publications that conveniently buy into the same myths you do, than the real world experiences of thousands of people.

Are you the same person who a while back stated that nobody posting comments on this thread was "qualified" to do so, and we should only listen to the biased automotive press? Whether or not you are that person, you sound a lot like them.

We have all heard the myth of Toyota's supposed divinity repeated over and over again. But as usual, no one has explained how/why Toyota has been having a their massive amounts engine failures.

Once again, please explain:

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

I noticed yesterday, while waiting in a dealership for my mom to buy a new Ford vehicle, that the 2009 F-150 was (wisely) chosen 2009 "Truck of the Year" by Motor Trend. I guess someone felt that Toyota had not addressed the Tundra's myriad problems.

Although full-size truck sales are all dropping (and Tundra's are basically dead in the water), Ford continues to be the full-size truck leader. That is as it should be. The trend in lots of more patriotic areas now is to avoid vehicles made by foreign-owned companies. My mom traded an import (which had been a BIG disappointment) for her Ford vehicle. I expect more and more people will follow this trend in years ahead. We need to support our own economy.

To all the Big 3 fans: guess what? Repeatedly listing websites about problems Toyota has had does not address the facts I posted about their reliability from major sources.

Of course they have problems. All machines do when you build hundreds of thousands or millions of them. But the FACT still remains that Toyota's and Honda's have far LESS problems than Ford, Chevy, or Dodge.

I will not allow you, nor does it make any sense, to try and refute that by listing a website that involves a mechanical issue that Toyota has had. I can do the same (very easily) with Ford, GM, and Dodge.

I still will not allow you to skirt around all the proof offered by claiming that YOU had problems with an import. Maybe you did, but the FACT still remains that people have less problems with Toyota because Toyota vehicles HAVE fewer issues, and all the proof I offered will support that. Still waiting for one of you domestic fans to address that.

The true facts are us driving full size new pickups, meaning 2007, 2008, 2009, and what we are really seeing as actual owners and our actual recent repair expenditures. I drive close to 30,000 a year a lot of that weekends and towing. I maintain the best indicator is your own personal expenditures on new ones.

I really like my new GM's and they have been very reliable and fun to own and drive. In the end it doesn't matter to anyone other than myself, but I would like others to know that I am very satisfied.

If you like small pickups, it seems that a Toyota commenter has praise for it. I am commenting as an actual owner as well on a new full sizes. I drive a lot and it's not causing repair headaches. At least test drive everything in your class and don't get lulled in without a comparison. There's old comments on old trucks on here... how about indicating what year you are commenting on? If it's 1989 or 1995, let us know so that we know what decade you are in.

For quite a few years, the Consumer Reports Buyers Guides usually had a line that said certain new models were being recommended even before any reliability data was in, because certain manufacturers had a long history of reliability and just generally were better companies. I can't remember exactly how they used to phrase it. One of those models was the 2006 Camry. When the data came in, they had to admit they had made a mistake and they now have a new policy that they only recommend models after they have gotten reliability data in.

"But, even while Consumer Reports had been writing accolades about Toyota for so long and perpetually placing them on their recommended list (EVEN WHILE ALL THESE TOYOTA ENGINE PROBLEMS WERE GOING ON), why is it now that they suddenly "rated" the Camry and Tundra as much worse than average in reliability and no longer recommend them. Is it possible that Consumer Reports could not cover for Toyota's horrible quality anymore, had to reluctantly give them a bad rating to try and save there already much precarious credibility, and then pretend that the problems only began recently"?

First question: (why is it now that they suddenly "rated" the Camry and Tundra as much worse than average in reliability and no longer recommend them.)

Answer: because they were new models with new problems that were widespread enough to change their ratings to below average.

Second question: (Is it possible that Consumer Reports could not cover for Toyota's horrible quality anymore, had to reluctantly give them a bad rating to try and save their already much precarious credibility, and then pretend that the problems only began recently?)

Answer: Unlikely; because Consumer Reports compiles owner data rather than simply doing a road test or by-the-feel-of-the-car quality test like many publications. The reason Toyotas received an across-the-board recommendation up until recently was because they had significantly fewer problems across the spectrum of problems and vehicles.

I'm sure someone will respond that Toyota was having engine troubles before this (sludging was a major issue if people were using non-synthetic oils and following some over-optimistic oil-change-interval recommendations). Yes, while this is true, the problems were still on few enough vehicles that they didn't skew the data when 10s of thousands of owners were factored in.

Nevertheless, domestic manufacturers are starting to really pick up their quality and are becoming viable alternatives to Asian imports. They were already more interesting. The imports tend to be kinda "white bread" appliances. If the Americans can revamp their reputations, they have a built-in advantage over the imports in the forms of; more interesting product lines, more devoted fan base, and a patriotic advantage (as is obvious on these forums).

"Are you the same person who a while back stated that nobody posting comments on this thread was "qualified" to do so, and we should only listen to the biased automotive press? Whether or not you are that person, you sound a lot like them".

Well I'm not and would imagine that this thread (including my post) itself serves as conclusive proof that NO qualification is necessary to post here. :)

So no I don't believe in most publications, but I do believe that "Consumer Reports" data is accurate. I read it but try to draw my own conclusions from the data. For example, I think that heavier duty vehicles (that are more likely to be used roughly) will naturally need more repairs than lighter duty vehicles. I also think that the road test portion of Consumer Reports is very subjective so just because they don't like how a car looks or feels doesn't mean that I'll feel the same. I love my Jeep Wrangler -- they hate it. So I think that the data -- if not the conclusions -- are valuable as long as you read it with an engaged mind and a willingness to do your own shopping. It is still the best source for large scale data covering most aspects of vehicular performance.

Cheers!

It's pretty funny that the one guy who keeps listing the one site - consumeraffairs.org as his ONE and only source of "proof" of how "bad" Toyotas are. Ironic since we in return could more quickly show you our "proof" by simply asking you to read any number of posts for various Ford and GM products on this very site.

It's so painfully obvious that significantly more people have problems with domestic brand vehicles than Japanese brands, that it seems silly to repeatedly make attempts to refute the truth of the actual situation.

But to put the consumeraffairs reference to rest, lets delve into these "problems" Toyota had.

1: The infamous engine sludging problem on select Toyota V6 engines from the 90's. The problem - which yes I admit - was a problem was due to an inadequate PCV system. As you know, the PCV system removes crank case gases, which if allowed to accumulate in the oil can in fact cause sludging, which is something that could happen on any car.

But the other half of this story is that the large majority of incidents reported were from owners who didn't change their oil frequently enough. In many cases, at 10-15,000 mile intervals. I was born and raised to change the oil every 3,000 miles, which I continue to do. I'm sorry, but if you change your oil every 15,000 miles, then don't be surprised if the engine blows. Regardless of the PCV system, oil accumulates contaminants and acids over time, and by not changing the oil regularly, you're chancing fate. My Brother has one of these engines in his 98' Avalon and 246,000 miles later, it still runs fine despite the fact that he seldom remembers to change the oil.

2: The 06'Camry transmission problem. This affected under 1/2 of 1% of all 06' V6 Camrys with the 6 speed automatic transmission. This is the top-of-the-line Camry, thus we're talking about a very small number affected. The problem was caused by a single faulty snap ring in the transmission. The problem has since been addressed.

3: Lastly, the Tundra Cam problem. This affected TWENTY TOTAL 5,7 Liter model Tundras. Toyota offered to do a full replacement of any engine affected. We're talking 20 out of 30,000 total trucks. It's hardly what I would call a major issue.

In summary, Toyota is like the perfect straight-A student whom typically excels at everything. But if they make even one tiny slip-up, the press is all over them along with the pro-domestic crowds. The irony here is that problems like these are far worse and more numerous in domestic brands. Yet we're conditioned to basically accept this since it's almost expected. That it is perfectly A-OK for GM and Ford to have millions of defective vehicles on the road - as proven by recalls that sometimes affect millions of vehicles, yet it's not OK for Toyota to have a small fraction of these is confusing to me indeed.

-- "To all the Big 3 fans: guess what? Repeatedly listing websites about problems Toyota has had does not address the facts I posted about their reliability from major sources... I can do the same (very easily) with Ford, GM, and Dodge." --

We could play this game all day, finding web sites that details all sorts of varying degrees of problems with a given manufacturer. But, we are talking about Toyota having COMPLETE LOW MILEAGE ENGINE FAILURES (E.G., BEFORE 80,000 - 100,000 MILES) ACROSS ALMOST THEIR ENTIRE PRODUCT LINE, i.e..

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

These types of issues have NOT been documented with domestics.

Likewise, the equally horrific problems of Tacoma's snapping frames and Tundra's bending out of shape just from driving down the road have also been documented in previous posts, but have NOT been experienced by domestics.

Yet your response, in typical Toyota apologetic fashion, is to just make excuses for them:

-- "Of course they have problems. All machines do when you build hundreds of thousands or millions of them." --

The "proof" you claim you have of Toyota's being superior, provided by automotive magazines has been proven wrong by real world experience. You just do not want to admit it.

As has been stated in previous posts, even Consumer Reports (the most biased publication of all) has had to do an about face, put on their kid gloves and delicately say some bad things about their icon Toyota, rating the Camry and Tundra as having much less than average reliability and vehicles to be avoided.

I personally do not put any stock in Consumer Reports, regardless of what they are saying, but you obviously do. Are you saying Consumer Reports was wrong for rating the Camry and Tundra's reliability as much worse than average and no longer recommending them?

Further regarding your supposed "proof," consider this. Not only was Consumer reports wrong about their previous ratings of Toyota based on their own admission (i.e., having to change the ratings of the Camry and Tundra to no longer recommended and state that it was not proper to rate based on presumed reliability), but also based on the data on Consumer Affairs and the dissatisfied Toyota owners on this site... you know, all of the people you simply ignore.

Moreover, Consumer Affairs and reviews on this site indicate that there are serious problems with many other Toyota vehicles besides the Camry and Tundra, essentially including their entire product line. If you want to use Consumer Reports as the gauge, having previously been wrong in their ratings of the Camry and Tundra, might it also be reasonable to seriously suspect that Consumer Reports has been wrong in their ratings of other Toyota models?

Any way you look at it, that is some very shaky "proof" you are peddling.