2002 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - All Comments

21:24 which new lot is the Tundra lot? Or is it full of Yaris and Prius models? Is this something you are proud about? I could see if you lived in Japan and had the profits returned there.

"The sad part about many of the anti-American comments on this site is that so many people are unaware of the dire consequences of..."

Having the ability to make an informed decision and have free choices is NOT anti-American. Sorry. I keep reading these same sort of posts over and over again, and truth be known, what I buy has nothing to do with my patriotism or anyone else's.

One thing is crystal-clear: the US has an evolving economy that continuously changes in regards to its primary industries. For example, I work as a graphic designer. 99% of what I design for goes online. 20 years ago 99% of it would have been printed on paper. As such, there has been a gradual decline in print production and as seen in the news, many newspapers are going out of business. But the news isn't stopping, but rather changing formats. Had I been working on one of those printing presses, I would have to make an important decisions: Either stay with a concept that was going obsolete or make motions to learn the current technology. I've personally changed careers three times, and I'm only 32. The world demands rapid change.

I use that analogy because in order to succeed, one must be flexible and willing to change careers, jobs, and learn new skills. Perhaps 50 years ago someone could work in the same GM plant doing the same remedial task, year in, year out and retire to the suburbs. That world no longer exists, and the auto worker, just like everyone else must learn to be adaptive and flexible.

As can be seen, the leanest, most efficient, and most respected companies survive in a modern economy. Regardless of what side of the fence you reside, you cannot deny the fact that GM, Ford, and Chrysler have not done a good job of adapting to change. They produced inferior products for decades until Japanese automakers introduced better built cars. They were slow to react, and even though I admit that they have made some solid gains in recent years, their action is too little too late, and not enough to persuade a skeptical consumer all too wary of their products.

You see, in the end it isn't about patriotism. It's about choice, and that choice is what makes the US economy what it is - a consumer driven economy. GM, Ford, and Chrysler have not transitioned into that economy. Perhaps they will. But in the meantime, don't call someone who made a conscious decision anti-American because that's totally inaccurate.

"If you do not like the Consumer Affairs site constantly being listed, then explain why Toyota is having all those engine failures and we can put the issue to bed."

I've posted about this before. The curious thing is that Consumer Affairs is so different from sites and sources that do actual surveys. It's interesting that they accept advertising. It's notable that it isn't a scientific survey but rather replaces all of the controls imposed by an attempt at impartiality with anecdote -- which is fine, but it tells you nothing about what percentage of vehicles are having a given problem. It's also odd that there is so few complaints about other vehicles... some have had quite a few issues of their own, yet there is very little commentary about them. The site also refers to the Tundra as ugly -- an odd pejorative for a site claiming independence.

Lastly it has a strong emphasis on litigation -- that's part of the reason they present for pressing the "complaint button". I pressed the button to see what info they might want and found that there was no info that could be used to check if an individual actually owned the vehicle at all (like registration #). All of these things can skew results.

That doesn't make them wrong. Or biased. But it should lead you to question what's up.

So explain that to say a 50 year old with a Masters Degree that was downsized and cannot find a job today. It's also called age discrimination... I know some auto workers that have retired and are working elsewhere for pension # 2, and one is actually going for a 3rd retirement pension in time. Not all have been job hoppers. I would have not had an issue remaining with the largest corporation in the world in business for 100 years. I guess we can fault the newspapers for their low quality next.

I would love to have a brand new Challenger (not the current automatic) anytime vs. say a Corolla or Camry as an alternative. Maybe when I am 75 I may change that viewpoint.

"You see, in the end it isn't about patriotism. It's about choice, and that choice is what makes the US economy what it is - a consumer driven economy. GM, Ford, and Chrysler have not transitioned into that economy. Perhaps they will. But in the meantime, don't call someone who made a conscious decision anti-American because that's totally inaccurate."

OK, let's say it ISN'T about patriotism. Let's say it's about WORLD economics. Are you aware that right now even the "can do no wrong" Japanese car makers are up against the wall because numerous companies that build various items THEY use are being affected by the slow sales of the Big Three? (USA Today, March 12, 2009) If we bury our heads in the sand long enough we can convince ourselves of anything. Of course by the time it becomes obvious that supporting U.S. auto makers effects the WORLD's economy it will be too late to salvage ANYONE'S auto industry. Enjoy your bicycles.

"Do you believe Fox News or CNN? Do you agree with the New York Times or the Washington Times? Do you agree with National Review or Time Magazine. All of these are major news sources, but I take it you and most people would disagree with one or the other of the pairs of sources I listed. Disagree with one of each or do not agree with one of them. There goes your argument that just because something appears in the news it has to be correct."

Very good comment. No source that I have read that deals with automotive news says Toyota is better overall than Ford in RELIABILITY. Just the contrary. Yes, you can find magazines and other sources that refer to domestic vehicles as "less sophisticated". People somehow interpret that as "less reliable". Definitely not so. "Sophisticated" means more gadgets and more opportunities for malfunctions. An excellent example of this is BMW's horribly complicated "I-Drive" system. A USA Today reviewer said in his review a couple of years ago that it would probably relegate this "sophisticated" car that ALL the car magazines love to the "Used cars to avoid list".

Another point: Both Mercedes and BMW are touted as "sophisticated, refined and benchmarks of quality". If you check their actual RELIABILITY ratings, many models are worse than the very worst of Fords. When car magazines spend their couple of hours with a vehicle they are impressed with only two things: will it do 0-60 in under 5 seconds, and how many little nifty buttons it has for electronic gadgetry. They actually care very little about ride (anything comfortable is called "sloppy handling") and there is NO WAY they can remotely make ANY decisions about reliability. I also feel there is a VERY strong built-in bias against anything made by the U.S. on the part of ALL automotive magazines. One has to be careful in how they read too much into a glowing review of a car that indicates NOTHING about how LONG the car will run.

Comment 11:18 makes a very good point as well. We have also owned numerous cars that had "worse than average" or "much worse than average" reliability ratings. Not a one of them ever had a single mechanical problem. I can't say it is because we took better care of them either. We took exactly the same care of our imports and they were all lemons.

All this is interesting, but it boils down to what your opinion of your new full size truck was purchased for. I am going to the new boat show this weekend and that's why I bought a new truck (for towing mostly).

Maybe some of you read newpapers, Consumer magazines while parked in the full size cab or are catching the final moments of Analog TV in your new full size trucks watching CNN. I carry my family, utilize the bed and tow. I personally examined the handling characteristics, room, comfort, capability and warranty. Maybe besides the initial commenter and myself are we the only full size truck owners on this thread? It seems full of Aveo, Taurus, Prius, Tacoma owners on a full size truck review. I have learned more about the small vehicles then on full size trucks. I do not sit in a parked cab reading stacks of newspapers, magazines and watching TV, I get out there and test and evaluate all my requirements directly. My truck performs and works, has a far superior warranty then Tundra as well. I have not had issues and I had far too many on my late model imports.

If I went on the Ferrari review and commented on trucks, it would probably not enlighten them to any degree as well. How about some new full size truck actual coverage direct comments/comparisons by some other full size owners on here?

I always read the USA Today car reviews, as they are not on anyone's payroll other than USA Today, and don't accept money from lobbyists for any of the auto makers. For that reason I feel they are very objective.

I loved today's review on the new 5-door Yaris. It was entitled "Yaris adds 2 doors but still comes up short". It referred to the Ford Focus as "roomier, sweet to drive and has a more upmarket feel".

In the realm of full-size trucks, the Tundra can't touch the reliability, quality or value of the Ford F-150. How anyone who remains current on things automotive can continue to refer to any domestic vehicle as "crap" is incredible.

19:04 Toyota's are not blowing engines in epidemic numbers. Any of the three, Ford, Chevy, or Dodge have a far, FAR higher percentage of premature engine failures than Toyota ever did, or has. PERCENTAGE... You cannot provide a single fact to back up your completely unfounded claims, because none exist.

YES... there are articles about Toyota engine failures. However, there are FAR more articles about the MUCH higher frequency and percentage of domestic engine (and transmission) failures than has ever been printed about Toyota, or is true. Go ahead... try and back up your claim with fact. You cannot. They are the highest quality vehicles on the road anywhere. That IS a documented fact, whether you agree or not.

19:34 EVERY source I have read, which means EVERY major one.. Consumer Reports, Car and Driver, Edmunds, MotorTrend, ALL rate Toyota as more reliable than Ford, of higher initial and long-term quality than Ford, and a safer bet as a used car purchase than Ford. I have no idea what YOU are reading; I'd love to get a single specific example of a major automotive magazine that rates Ford as more reliable than Toyota. The problem is, there aren't any. And please, don't find one single Ford that has a better rating than a single Toyota. We're talking about OVERALL ratings, which manufacturer is better. And Toyota undoubtedly is.

As far as Toyota being more sophisticated, and they are even as you define it... what that means is engine design. They run more smoothly because they're designed and built far better. Which obviously means they'll generally last longer. And they do.

Smooth running, quiet and great comfort can easily be determined by a test drive. Maybe I am one of the few that did that on here with both domestic and import full sizes. Note... full size. There must be a reason we are not seeing a spectacular warranty offered on Toyotas. If the vehicles are so flawless then what's with the engine sludging, air bag issues, brake, trans issues? Saying domestics have more is a cop out. There should be none at all. Impress us with a 100,000 mile plus warranty to perhaps get me back to buying them again.

Who are buying all the Tundras past and present to displace all the others? Quite frankly I feel people are really looking, testing and filling applications when they look at full sizes. More Yaris comments and Consumer Reports... that's fine how about writing your first hand observations for others on here as a result of a 2009 test drive? I could care less how many Prius sell. I will never own one and if I were interested I would go on the Prius/Yaris thread. Full size trucks anyone that has driven any wish to share some comments any?

15:48.

I think you asked for more comments before, so I posted one on my old 2000 Tundra SR5. It is the same as this 2002 model so it was completely on-topic. I've also posted it in the past because, like you, I think that full-size truck commentary is the most appropriate on a full-sized truck review (go figure, huh?) :)

What do you drive? Do you also tow heavier stuff than boats? How does it do? I'm asking because I want real info from owners because its unlikely that I would hook up to my 7000lb trailer on a test drive (I'm always timid about stuff like that when I don't own the vehicle yet).

Other owners are the best source for info like that. My personal favorite towing vehicles are the Chevy/GMC with the Allison transmission and the Dodge with the Cummins. Any thoughts? I like the F250-350 but I've talked with owners who are having some troubles when they tow.

Sorry if you have posted this info before, but I don't know who you are so I can't be sure if you have or haven't.

-- I'd love to get a single specific example of a major automotive magazine that rates Ford as more reliable than Toyota. The problem is, there aren't any. --

Well, here is MSNBC reporting on JD Power and Associate's survey with an article titled, "Ford Beats Toyota in Quality Rankings"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19073071/

Does that qualify?

-- As far as Toyota being more sophisticated, and they are even as you define it... what that means is engine design. They run more smoothly because they're designed and built far better. Which obviously means they'll generally last longer. And they do. --

Lasting longer??:

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

Aside from the engine failures noted above that you still refuse to address, just what aspect of Toyota's engine designs are more sophisticated? Wasn't it Toyota who was using carburetors and vacuum lines into the '90's while most of the rest of the industry had switched to fuel injection? Who (GM) was using sequential port fuel injection long before it was mandated by the government, while Toyota was still using regular (banked) multi-port? Don't forget, GM owned Huges Electronics (makers of space/satellite electronic systems), so they have a lot of engineering know how in that area they transfered to their vehicles, and have been industry leaders in it for many years.

After Toyota was forced to modify its archaic engine control systems in 1996 to conform to OBDII as an example, wasn't it they who lied to the federal government on the architecture and readiness of its evaporative emission control systems (knowing they had failed to design one that worked), got caught after the systems started having massive failures and was fined for it? You do not hear of other manufacturers having these types of problems, only Toyota.

What aspect of Toyota's "sophisticated" engine designs lead to 60-70 degree temperature variations between the head (s) and engine block in Toyota engines (when the industry standard is 10-15 degrees), which is a likely cause of sludging and engine failures Toyota has been experiencing, whether you want to admit it or not.

GM as another example builds engines that are more powerful than Toyota engines, placed in heavier vehicles, yet deliver better (hp/weight) fuel economy than lighter less powerful Toyota vehicles. Which of those engines has the more sophisticated design? And do not even start in with the overhead valve (pushrod) vs. overhead cam debate, because the overhead cam engine is an older design than (i.e., was designed before) the overhead valve engine.

You are desperately clinging to a tired myth of Toyota's supposedly being superior, still hoping there are enough people left who also buy into it, to make your comments appear to have any relevance. But the true facts, which do not include the subjective opinions of biased automotive reporters who could not engineer their way out of a paper bag, do not support the old myth.

All my friends who have owned Toyotas have had nothing but trouble. Stick with GM or Ford and you won't be disappointed!

"19:34 EVERY source I have read, which means EVERY major one.. Consumer Reports, Car and Driver, Edmunds, MotorTrend, ALL rate Toyota as more reliable than Ford, of higher initial and long-term quality than Ford, and a safer bet as a used car purchase than Ford."

Well, first off, two weeks ago on MSN it was clearly stated "Ford now is EQUAL in RELIABILITY" to "the BEST Japanese cars" (and I doubt Toyota any longer qualifies as "one of the best). Consumer Reports rates the entire Ford line as on a par with Toyota in reliability over all. The Fusion ranks TWO LEVELS HIGHER in reliability than the Camry. Please cite your sources for "reliability". Motor Trend and Car and Driver DO NOT test for reliability, so they CAN'T make any reliability projections on ANYTHING. Car magazines drive cars for a couple of hours then list THEIR OPINIONS of the cars, not ANYTHING SUBJECTIVE... EVER.

I just read a review that criticized the grille and interior vinyl finish on a Fusion. Now how OBJECTIVE is THAT?? I LIKE the grille and vinyl finish. That's PURELY OPINION, which is what virtually EVERY SINGLE IMPORT RANT is based on.

We've requested cited sources and frequency of repair records. What we've gotten is vague references to magazines that have not the slightest connection to reliability testing in any way, shape or form. The article in the October 2007 issue of Consumer Reports showcased the highest mileage vehicle in the article. It was a Ford truck with 488,000 miles and going strong. I'd consider that pretty good "proof" of reliability. Show me an article on ANY Toyota that has gone 488,000 miles...EVER. There is not a single gas-engined Toyota in the "million mile club". There is at least 1 Ford (that I know of) and one Cadillac. That says a lot about long-term reliability.

When it comes to used car values, how can you possibly argue that a LESS reliable car costing $5000 MORE is a GOOD buy??? I just bought a Ford Fusion with 18,000 miles on it. It is fully loaded including leather. I paid $13,000. A comparable Camry would have been $18,000. Now what POSSIBLE ADVANTAGE is there in paying $5000 MORE for a car that is rated TWO LEVELS WORSE in reliability?? The Camry is rated as "average" by the VERY MAGAZINE you cited as a source, while the Fusion is rated "MUCH BETTER than average". Even the Accord is rated one level lower than the Fusion. When shopping for a good deal on a used car, it WON'T be a Japanese car. If $5000 more for a less reliable car is a "good deal" then I'll take the "bad deal" ANY DAY!!