2002 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - All Comments

Wow, that is a statement from a hardcore Toyota apologist! "Oh, everybody has to replace transmissions within 30,000 miles! What's the big deal?!" These people are missing out.

I agree with the other guy --- the only one of the dozen American cars that my family has ever owned that had a transmission die was a 1999 Pontiac 6000 that had 210,000 miles on it. I also had a '73 Dodge that had been heavily abused, and drove it with a slipping transmission for 30,000 miles, at which time it had about 160,000 miles on it. Had it rebuilt for $500, and it's still going.

Something is wrong with the editing on this site. If I say something using the exact same phrase as someone else but simply change the assertion, their post will get printed, but mine won't. I'm not sure, but I suspect that some of the commentary is coming from editors. When someone was obviously irritated and saying rather incendiary things, I've tried to say that they shouldn't be irritated. His irritation gets posted. My attempt at quelling it won't be. One person asserts that American vehicles are twice as good as imports. I respond that they are half as good. His post is printed, mine isn't. They were equal opposites. It was a good test.

I don't expect this to be printed but, to whomever is reading this, you should consider the possibility that this site's approach to commentary isn't even-handed.

"The 07 Camry goes from 0-60 in 6.5 seconds according to Edmunds (and just about everyone else), not 10 seconds like you incorrectly infer. The 06 was also far quicker than 10 seconds too."

If you had actually read my comment, you would have noted that I said that the Camry was chosen in 2007 because it had finally (IN 2007) built an engine that could do 0-60 in less than 10 seconds. The pre-2007 Camry V-6's took about 10 seconds 0-60 according to most sources, and I know this is about right because my 4-cylinder Grand Am will beat a pre-2007 V-6 Camry by about 10 car-lengths in a typical block. CR lists the 0-60 time for the post-2006 V-6 Camry as 7.5 seconds (provided it can be kept running for 7.5 seconds, which has been a bit of a challenge for many of them).

"Nearly every company replaces transmissions in vehicles before 30,000 miles --- "

Well, DOMESTIC companies DON'T. I have NEVER had a transmission replaced (or even worked on) on any of my numerous domestics, including some that made over a quarter of a million miles. If I EVER had a transmission fail before 30,000 miles I certainly would never buy another car from THAT company, foreign OR domestic.

"The 07 Camry goes from 0-60 in 6.5 seconds according to Edmunds (and just about everyone else), not 10 seconds like you incorrectly infer. The 06 was also far quicker than 10 seconds too."

From what I can figure out doing some web searches and reading forum comments, here is what I think happened. When Toyota decided to make a 268 HP Camry, they decided to focus on fuel economy rather than performance. Before they got some good transmission software worked out, it was time to start selling the cars. You can find on different forums lots of complaints about V6 Camrys having poor acceleration. And there are many complaints from people saying they almost got into accidents in intersections when their Camry unexpectedly would not accelerate as expected. I think the problem is confined to early models of the 268 HP Camrys.

It appears that Toyota eventually did come out with new transmission software and the acceleration improved, but they had to give up some of the fuel economy they had been trying to achieve.

Maybe someone with more direct experience with this on a Camry can comment on it. My interpretation of this may be off because I had a similar problem with a 1998 Taurus. I bought it from my sister-in-law when it was two years old. For the first month I had it, it sometimes had poor acceleration, and unpredictably almost no acceleration in a turn in an intersection. It seemed to happen when I was approaching an intersection at about 20 mph and then tried to accelerate right when I started the turn.

I heard that car had "smart transmission software" that adapted to your driving style. Maybe the problem was that I drove differently than my sister-in-law did? I never figured that out. But the problem was fixed when I brought it back to the dealer and they re-programmed the transmission. The problem never reoccurred over the next 5 years I owned the car before I sold it.

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

steven@carsurvey.org

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

In reply to 6th Mar 2009, 19:11.

Editing takes place to stop the discussion from boiling over into open warfare. It's a very fine line between making a point forcefully, and being offensive. It's my decision in the end, and I hold my hands up that I don't always get it right. I try very hard to be even handed, but in the end it's up to visitors and members to come to their own judgment.

If you're got concerns about a particular comment, email me the details at the above address. I'm happy to discuss things, and have made changes following such discussions many times.

If people want to have a discussion about the policies of Carsurvey.org, either email me, or post a comment on my blog if you want a public discussion: http://www.distantparts.com/2009/03/07/231/

Steven Jackson, CSDO Media Limited (the company that runs Carsurvey.org)

"You owned all of the cars they ever made? None of my imports did either, but that doesn't mean that some don't. Your (or my) experience isn't universal."

Let's see, all of our domestics have never had any real problems. Probably because we keep them maintained. I do not have to own every vehicle to know domestics make good cars. I never said imports are bad. I am just saying if I did have a car that transmission went out before 30k; I would be very angry.

I stick with Fords. Out of all the cars my family owned, they are most reliable.

My comment sounded like hard core Toyota apologetics and didn't appear to accurately respond to his 0-60 assertion because of editing. I was TRYING to make bald inaccurate statements WITHOUT proof because I think that this style is being embraced on this forum while virtually all independent sources are disparaged as biased... and this simply because some don't agree with the outcome of the research. I inferred as much but had that part of my comment removed... which served to completely rework the meaning of what I said. Instead of saying that this style of assertion is baseless like I was trying to, I ended up appearing to engage in the very thing with which I disagree.

Thanks Steven for your reply. I understand your points.

"Let's see, all of our domestics have never had any real problems. Probably because we keep them maintained. I do not have to own every vehicle to know domestics make good cars. I never said imports are bad. I am just saying if I did have a car that transmission went out before 30k; I would be very angry.

I stick with Fords. Out of all the cars my family owned, they are most reliable"

I also have had no transmission problems with either the 6 domestics or the 6 imports (weird that we would have owned an equal number of each). I usually own them to somewhere near 100,000 miles. Obviously I don't think that domestics are problematic or I wouldn't own them (I own 2 domestics and one import currently). My point, though, is that our experience isn't conclusive.

I agree, domestic companies make some very fine cars. But that doesn't make them ALL good. It's too narrow of a slice of the whole to come to a conclusion like that. Likewise someone thinking that a car that comes from Japan HAS to be good is making the same mistake.

I can, however, completely understand how an owner of 20 trouble-free domestics (or imports) would continue to buy them. After all, they've never been given a reason to change.

A broken tranny prior to 30,000 miles WOULD be a reason to reconsider my purchasing paradigm. I wouldn't stop buying vehicles from an entire region because of it, but I would stop buying that vehicle. I also might stop buying from that company if their service was unsatisfactory.

Speaking of Ford, I really like the new Fusion Hybrid and F150. I also think that the new Mustang will be a hit if gas prices haven't ended that type of buying. I think they sell the most reliable full sized van. The area I think they need to work on is small cars. They haven't been able to produce them at a profit --- in the past. But with the new concessions from labor, they should be able to bring over more of their European cars and do more home-grown development.

Over 900 off topic comments so far. I am quite impressed with hearing 0-60 times with the Camry on a full size truck review. My sons Viper goes 0-60 slightly under 4 seconds... 1st gear up to 60 with 5 gears left. Sounds impressive until you realize it has perhaps zero interest on a late model full size truck review.

After test driving the new Tundra, if anyone is interested, I found a better value and capability with GM Silverado. The handling, ride, load carrying, people carrying, towing and far superior warranty sold us. If anyone else has a full size truck and has tested/owned anything remotely equivalent I have interest in full size truck comments. Maybe that is why I hope to read comments on this review to keep abreast of full size new truck developments. Alas I suspect I am one of few that own a full size truck on here and keep hoping to see some full size truck comparisons updates not Camrys, health care plans, political science lectures and the like.

Taking a wild guess, I would say 4 people have a full size truck out of over 900 comments... my guess but I would feel pretty confident that it is quite accurate.

"I don't expect this to be printed but, to whomever is reading this, you should consider the possibility that this site's approach to commentary isn't even-handed."

I have corresponded with Steven, and have had my OWN comments censored. I feel that every effort is made to keep the comments non-inflammatory and that does require some censoring. Import fans frequently use "crap" to describe cars many Americans feel very strongly about. That is offensive to those of us who support the American auto industry and prefer domestic vehicles. To accuse Steven of being biased because he refuses to allow abusive comments about other posters is not called for. I appreciate very much that he allows wide-ranging (but relevant) comments, and I staunchly support his right to edit any comments (MINE as well) that might come across as offensive.

"I staunchly support his right to edit any comments (MINE as well) that might come across as offensive."

I do as well but you can imagine how frustrating it is to respond to comments that question my statements when the commenters aren't even aware that MY comment was meant to be primarily self-discrediting. I was mixing unsupported truth, hyperbole, fabrication, partial-truth, and the deliberate misconstruing of others comments to shame these tactics' use.

But I yield to his right to edit. My comment may, indeed, have been too inflammatory. However, in this case, I would have preferred that the WHOLE comment be deleted. But that's a tough call for an editor to make, so I take responsibility for my own "pre-editing" failure.

Well, let's get back to the point then... look at the original review again - "No more GM". That says enough for me. Apparently, this person, like many hundreds of thousands of others, has had enough with crappy GM products. He has switched to Toyota and is happy about that, as is every other person I have ever spoken to that previously owned "domestics". I am part of this group. After owning three Toyota's, you'd have to give me a Chevy, Ford, or Dodge if I'm ever to drive one again. If I'm paying for it myself, it'll be a Toyota, because they run better, smoother, last longer, break down less, and are worth more on trade in because they're built well enough to hold their value. Period.

Why not a detailed comparison on new Tundras and the competition... size, capability, warranty, room, handling etc.

I think this argument is based on historical performance, expectations, and facts.

I myself am a perfect example of what happens when a company such as GM, Ford, and Chrysler spend decades ignoring the importance of fit, finish, and overall quality. I am 32 years old. When I was a kid, Mom had a 78' Malibu. Dad drove a Oldsmobile Delta 88. Later Dad had a Buick Riviera. The problem was that all three of these cars were jalopies. I specifically recall Dad cussing almost every time we took the Buick out to the store since something was perpetually broke. I have memories of spending many Saturdays in dealership waiting rooms while the Buick, Malibu, or Delta 88 had some other issue repaired.

Then Dad bought the company car, a 2 year old 85' Camry. We kept it for almost 10 years before buying another Camry. It never had a problem, which to us was simply amazing. That was followed by a steady stream of other Toyotas: a Toyota truck, 4runner, Avalon, and now a Tundra. NONE - and I mean none of these have had anything other than routine maintenance, and trust me - my parents are not the best at remembering to do things like change the oil and so forth.

So there's the reason for the bias. Perhaps today's bias is undeserved and American cars are now as good as Japanese brands - specifically the Big Three Japanese brands. But cars and trucks are expensive, and if you have distinct memories of how bad American cars were in the 70's and 80's (don't deny it - they were AWFUL back then) then would you be willing to make a possible $20,000 mistake in today's economy? As you can see, GM, Ford, and Chrysler made some bad mistakes that haunt them to this very day.

In regards to these comments:

"The Tacoma has exactly the SAME reliability rating as the Ford Ranger, which is less expensive and comes with a better warranty."

My brother owned a Ranger. I say owned because the transmission gave up at 160k. I still have my Tacoma of the same vintage, still going at 220,000 miles. No need to say more.

"I don't understand how people who are supposedly car-literate keep confusing the Aveo with GM-built cars. The Aveo is Korean. It is basically a mechanical twin under the sheet metal to the Hyundai Accent. I have driven the Aveo and found it to be an incredibly smooth and good riding car for a sub-compact. The ride is better than that of the Accent. Friends who own Aveos and follow the recommended maintenance procedures have had no trouble with theirs, though the highest mileage any of them has on theirs is just over 98,000 miles."

You'd be surprised. Many I've read here suddenly like the Aveo just because it has a Chevy badge stuck to the front. But the cars are abysmal excuses of engineering. These are NOT rated very highly at all. I personally rented one in Hawaii, hated the ride and comfort so much that I returned it 2 hours later and upgraded. You couldn't pay me to own that car. It's an embarrassment and GM needs to yank the plug on it.

20:40 Toyota what? GM what? How many were Tundras, Silverados or are we on a car or small truck comment? That is exactly what the problem is with generalization of a manufacturer...

What year Tundras, Silverados did you own? There's 3 involved. How was the towing, load carrying and other capabilities of your Tundra vs. Silverado? And warranty.