2002 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - All Comments

"People need to get out there and actually understand how the market works."

And your post is informative and simple enough to help us do exactly that. Thank you.

"The Tundra has more horsepower, torque, and towing capacity than either of those trucks if I'm not mistaken. Not to mention it's a Toyota, and not a Chevy, which means that it isn't a misaligned collection of cheap parts like a Chevy is."

Look up the 2005 Toyota Camry long-term test on Edmunds. MULTIPLE posts WITH pictures about the poor alignment of interior pieces and the crappy quality of which it was assembled.

Tundra has more hp... so great if you do straight line stoplight to stoplight. I think the best again is to test drive. I personally like the better handling, people carrying, ride, comfort, load capacity, towing capability and better warranty with the new GM Silverado however.

"(The U.S.) has the highest quality healthcare (though its not generally available) "

The "though it's not generally available" says it all. What good is high-quality health care if your child is left unattended in an emergency room to bleed to death while you have to run home to get your insurance card (better yet, what if you don't HAVE insurance). Every day in the U.S. people are condemned to lingering, agonizing deaths because they are denied health care (and PLEASE, none of this "hospitals HAVE to treat emergencies". It isn't true). DEVELOPED nations care about their people... ALL of them. The foreign reporter was correct: The U.S. IS an "undeveloped" nation. Hopefully that will change.

As for the auto industry, the lack of medical care for our citizens is the BIGGEST factor in their financial issues. It has NOTHING to do with fuel economy (GM builds more fuel-efficient vehicles than Honda and Toyota COMBINED) or reliability (Ford is rated equal in reliability to the best Japanese manufacturers). The F-150 is once again "Truck of the Year" and STILL the best-selling vehicle by a HUGE margin for 28 straight years.

11:28;

As for your health care comments... you already said all that. But as I said, you can dance alone because we can't even agree enough on the base facts to have an informed debate.

As for your automotive comments I agree with pretty much all you said, but would add that GM and Ford, if they can make it through the recession, will become leaner and meaner competitors. Their cost structures are now competitive.

They are, indeed, building many fuel efficient models. Now they just need to be able to make some money on them. Unlike Toyota and Honda, GM hasn't been able to profitably build smaller vehicles for years. The government FORCED them to build them via CAFE. But they built them relying on trucks and SUVs to keep them profitable (I read this on about.com cars and Car and Driver, by the way).

The other thing I would add is that, health care aside, the domestics had a much higher wage, benefit, and legacy structure (according to the automakers' own figures as reported nearly everywhere) which was forcing them to build vehicles elsewhere... which has served the Japanese well as they are able to profitably build here and propagate the claim that they are just as "domestic" as the Big Three.

But tomorrow is a new day and the domestics may well recover their former glory. It will take time, but the cost of failure would be nearly unthinkable.

"and PLEASE, none of this "hospitals HAVE to treat emergencies". It isn't true"

You may want to check some legal sites before you say more. There is a federal statute called EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act) that requires hospitals (public and private) to provide limited screening, emergency care and stabilization if they are equipped to, or to provide transport to the proper facility if they aren't. In addition, Certain states also impose duties to offer emergency assistance, especially if the facility is a non-profit or charitable health care provider.

11:28.

Agree with everything you said.

I think properly run (by citizens and elected officials at a regional level) national health care is a conservative idea. What company (i.e., GM) would not like to get health care costs off their balance sheet and have that responsibility transferred to where it rightfully belongs, the person receiving the health care? Companies should "hire" people, not be forced to "adopt" them. Is it any wonder companies are shifting their operations overseas?

I do not support government intervention into businesses. All these "bailouts" that are occurring are atrocious. Japan tried exactly what the US is trying in the early 1980's and their entire economy almost collapsed. But, the health care crisis (and I do not care what anybody says, we have one) is a national security issue. Thus, it falls within the very limited scope of what government should get involved in.

I should not have to face losing my house if someone in my family or I gets sick. I own my own company and and have to buy private health insurance. It is bad enough that I spend more for health insurance than my mortgage and all my other expenses. But, do you know what would happen if I ever had to use it? We would get dropped, or our premium would become so high that we could not possibly afford it?

My family and I have a policy that we will only use our health insurance in a dire emergency, because once we use it, we all know that is the end of it, or at the very least the end of my company, because I will have to go back to being a 9-5 employee on a stipend salary, just to get "guaranteed" coverage. That doesn't seem like the American dream to me.

I suspect that all of the people here who disagree with national health care are on the dole receiving health insurance from their employers. I bet you would be singing a different tune if you ever wanted to stop being a perpetual employee and work for yourself.

11:28 OK... 1. GM does NOT build more fuel efficient vehicles than Honda OR Toyota, and most definitely not combined. Honda and Toyota are the two most 'fuel efficient' auto manufacturers in the world. GM is not.

2. Ford is NOT rated in reliability with ANY Japanese auto manufacturer. ALL major publications still, as usual, rate Japanese automobiles at the top of that list.

The Hybrid Tahoe gets better fuel economy than the Camry. However, since this is a full size truck review... and if anyone more than maybe 3 or 4 on the entire review that perhaps even actually own one, there are primary considerations beyond just pump miserly concerns. It's clearly evident very few ever discuss function and applications, and why a full size truck is purchased to start with.

When I buy one, I look at the bed, the hitch ratings, the power, the cooling aspects, then room, comfort, handling, people carrying, warranty and quite frankly I do not even check my mileage or fuel anyway.

I need a full size truck and tow. If I did not and commuted solo to work maybe a cheap little ride might be the concern. But when you buy a full size truck, you do not walk in and start up immediately on not caring about applications.

I have had mid size import sedans that required 93 octane by the way, and again I opted for performance, capability and handling being more an enjoyable part of ownership. If you own a small car or small little truck, and are on a full size truck review, at least consider why real actual people buy them. Again it's purpose, function and having applications.

It sometimes get pretty political on here, and half of that conversation drifted into application and needs it might help prospective buyers and actual individuals that have ownership interest.

21:29.

You're talking about PERCENTAGE of vehicles getting "good" gas mileage from these manufacturers or perhaps the CAFE number. 11:28 was talking about NUMBERS of models rated to get 30 mpg or better as found on GMs advertising. So you're probably both right.

"11:28 OK... 1. GM does NOT build more fuel efficient vehicles than Honda OR Toyota, and most definitely not combined. Honda and Toyota are the two most 'fuel efficient' auto manufacturers in the world. GM is not'

Check the EPA figures yourself. GM builds more 30mpg+ vehicles than Toyota and Honda COMBINED and has for a decade. This is a good example of claims tossed out by import fans. The highest rated cars besides hybrids sold in the U.S. (according to EPA figures) are BOTH GM with the possible exception of the Fit and Yaris. I haven't checked the revised figures on those, but I am virtually certain they are STILL lower than GM's. It gets tiresome defending one of our major industries from all the myths propagated by Japanese car companies.

"2. Ford is NOT rated in reliability with ANY Japanese auto manufacturer. ALL major publications still, as usual, rate Japanese automobiles at the top of that list."

No, the most recent article on the U.S. auto industry (MSN, Feb. 2009) states very clearly "Ford is now rated EQUAL in reliability to the BEST Japanese cars". That means Honda, as Toyota has plummeted in quality over the past decade.

Again, please verify FACTS before making such incorrect statements. The "recommended" status for some Toyota models was pulled by CR last year because they proved so UNRELIABLE.

"and PLEASE, none of this "hospitals HAVE to treat emergencies". It isn't true"

"You may want to check some legal sites before you say more. There is a federal statute called EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act) that requires hospitals (public and private) to provide limited screening, emergency care and stabilization if they are equipped to, or to provide transport to the proper facility if they aren't. In addition, Certain states also impose duties to offer emergency assistance, especially if the facility is a non-profit or charitable health care provider.'

Yes, there are laws against hospitals denying care to patients in urgent immediate need. There are also laws that state that driving 80mph in a 60mph zone is illegal, but do you know of even ONE driver who OBEYS it? (well, maybe the guy with the mangled rear bumper from getting rear-ended). Having laws DOES NOT mean they will be OBEYED. I know many people who work in the health care field. ALL of them have horror stories about "dumping". This is the practice hospitals use to avoid treating patients without insurance. It involves "referring" them to a charity hospital (never mind that it may be HOURS away) and leaving them to die on the way. And YES, it DOES happen every day.

To all you domestic fans: pick up the new Consumer Reports, 2009, Best and Worst car issue. As always, and has been exhaustively stated, Japanese automobiles come out ahead in every single category. Just spent a half hour reading. I'm not going to repeat the entire thing, go read the facts for yourself.

Most reliable? Toyota/Honda. Best buys? Toyota/Honda.

Most fuel efficient? Toy./Honda.

Highest initial quality and long-term reliability? Toyota/Honda.

It even explains in the beginning of the book how the tests are done and how the results are compiled. They go buy them anonymously, just as you or I would, and drive them for years, just like you and I would. Those that have problems and break down get the worst of the ratings.

As usual, Dodge is pathetic, the very worst of the bunch, GM is hardly better than that, and Ford, while the best of the domestics, trails FAR behind Toyota, Honda, and Nissan.

Oh, and by the way, Consumer Reports isn't biased, so don't say something like that. They don't accept advertising from any auto manufacturer. They just tell you what breaks down and what doesn't.

P.S. The even funnier list is the "used automobiles to avoid" list - literally dozens and dozens of Fords, Chevy's, and Dodges, and ONE single Toyota and ONE single Honda.

If you're going to pretend that the Big 3 make good cars, read the facts that prove otherwise.

So when looking for a full size truck do you walk in say I need 30 MPG and I have Blue Cross Blue Shield? I'll love to see the facial expressions of the new sales dept. when I walk in to buy my next new one and hand my check with that concept.