2002 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - Off Topic Comments

16:22 Again, your leap of "logic" makes no sense. I didn't say I haven't driven a Tundra; I have. I said I didn't own one. And my knowledge of the FACT that Toyota makes better vehicles comes through 15 years of Toyota ownership, after making the switch from crappy, wallet-emptying domestics that break down, get poor gas mileage, poor resale value, and poor performance in general. I remedied ALL of that by buying Toyota's.

21:54 Incorrect. Any Toyota IS the best new truck you can buy. If you're buying anything else instead of a Toyota of the same size, you've made a mistake.

I understand that Toyota (wisely) doesn't offer something equivalent in towing capacity to an F-250 or larger, but if you're buying an F-150, or anything else the size of the Tundra, you screwed up.

The Toyota has the better engine, drivetrain...well, EVERYthing about it is superior.

Logic dictates that if one owns a specific category of vehicle and consistently replaces such vehicle, they gather first hand ownership experience.

Again, all your Toyota comments are opinion and since you have not throughly tested and/or owned late models in a different (not entry level category) I cannot see how you can condemn any entire mfr.

I have seen good and bad within even a few years both domestic and import. I am not an unequivocal authority until I have driven specific makes and model years.

I tested the Tundra twice lately and did not buy. It is not the best choice and that's an opinion exactly as yours.

The opinion has value as it's your own, but not everyone is agreeing. You have to determine your needs and budget and make extensive test drives. I do not walk into any dealership without comparing anymore. However I draw the line not condemning every single Toyota model as I have not driven them extensively, lived with them on a daily basis just as you have with your Tacoma ownership.

21:54 is very accurate. You can't begin to assess the usefulness of a 2008 Tundra based on a 1988 Tacoma. In truth Toyota is currently selling far fewer Tundras than they were a year ago not only because of the economy, but because they simply can't compete with the Silverado, F-150 and Ram. The sales of the Tundra has dropped by a much larger percentage than the F-150 in the past 6 months. This is mainly because they simply are not as competitive in business applications as real trucks are.

Also, comparing a 1988 Tacoma to ANY new vehicle makes very little sense. ALL of the Toyota line has been hit by what automotive magazines are referring to as a "lapse in quality". The new Tacoma is not all that reliable either. Just check some of the new Tacoma reviews.

To all the domestic owners posting here: refer back to the headline of the review; "Great truck, no more GM". The reviewer's last post was in July. The truck is six years old, is the best truck he has owned, and is flawless. Not surprised at all. This is the experience that ACTUAL Toyota owners usually relay. It only comes as a surprise after you switch to Toyota from Ford, GM, or Dodge.

The first Toyota is a surprise when you realize that you can drive them for years without fixing ANYthing, like you have to with a domestic. Same experience I had, and everybody I ever knew that ACTUALLY owned a Toyota.

I've said this before, but difference in design and build quality is plain to see on the road, but it's painfully obvious off road. Always got a laugh out of some guy showing up with an S-10, Dakota, or Ranger (or any full size domestic) trying to follow us Toyota owners around in the quarry we off road in. If they tried to go where we went (we're talking stock trucks here) it never took long before they were hung up on the frame (S-10's especially, the frame hangs down well below the body; useless off road), or they broke something in the suspension, stalled out in a 3' deep puddle, transmission went out... etc. Just like today, the Toyota's went right through it all and the rest got stuck or more often, broke down. Other than Jeeps, and they only survived because of the short wheel base. Now Toyota has embarrassed the 'big' 3 with the Tundra in the full size truck market.

Refer to comment 14:55. It pretty much says all that is necessary in this debate. Comparing a 20-year-old Tacoma to ANY current vehicle is pointless.

"Now Toyota has embarrassed the 'big' 3 with the Tundra in the full size truck market"

Gosh, maybe they'll "embarrass" the big three back into a high-profit situation. With "competition" like the Tundra, that is a very real possibility!!

21:46 I would not consider the Tundra as a highly successful launch vehicle, and should have stayed in the small truck segment only.

The recent annual sales less than 200,000 is embarrassing to whom? There are far superior choices and the full size truck segment is very savvy... it's not just like a small car to get A to B. If the vehicle is the truck of your dreams, why not buy a new one rather than drive an old small Tacoma truck? It seems like your time could focus on trucks you own in the same class vs. Rangers and the like.

Full size truck owners have utility and function aspects that prompt their buying decisions as well as great service, warranty, features and performance. I certainly hope others throughly test drive all and make the best personal decision that meets all their applications, and add each up accordingly. Then buy.

How many people run their new larger Tundras through the mud and swamps? It seems like something for a small empty pickup driver that drives alone. I'll have to ask the dealer next time this question when he sells a new full size truck again to me. I like 4WD, a trans cooler and a powerful V8 for heavy towing,steep inclines, bad weather conditions and especially slick ramps however. Long distance towing at turnpike speeds barely loping down the interstate with comfort and room is fine too. Not breaking axles as described.

Due to its lagging sales there is a good chance Toyota will cease production of the Tundra. Some of its plants are already in the process of switching from the big, gas guzzling vehicles (Tundra gets worse mileage than most domestics) to smaller vehicles. The quality did go up on the new generation Tundra due to its copying many features from the super-successful F-150, but it is still a very long way from being serious competition for an domestic truck.

10:42, Well, gosh! Too bad for you that your wishes don't translate into fact. The Big 3 (again, laughable to call them "Big" at this point) AREN'T in a high profit situation, they're a government bailout-shy of being out of business completely!

Meanwhile, Toyota is worth a lot more than all 3 of them combined, and billions on top of that. See what making quality vehicles does for a company? Even when the economy is tough, they do well and people buy them. Maybe if GM and Ford had decided to make anything worth half what they charge for it, people wouldn't have turned to a foreign company for a good, quality automobile. Too late.

I trust GM enough to tow my boat worth twice what a typical Tundra costs. Fuel economy is all well and good applying car

comparisons... but buying cheap fuel thoughts is not the primary reason one buys a full size truck. I know that it hard to sink in as one that focuses on Tacoma small trucks and cars. If you are so concerned about Ford, do not forget GM has a far better vehicle in our opinion. It certainly rides better, handles better, better warranty, more room and strength.

Maybe you ride solo and never tow or carry loads just off road... maybe the small Tacoma is suited well for that with its suspension. I just do not see that limited application as an inducement to buy. People buy full sizes for utility and applications... why buy a full size truck to go empty up the interstate? I have never had broken axles, fires in any of my new trucks ever. I once had a spark plug spit out of the aluminum head removing from a VW (import) back in the 60's and thats the extent of that.

"Even when the economy is tough, they do well and people buy them".

Really? Then explain why Toyota and Honda sales are down MORE than Ford's.

I find it wholeheartedly HILARIOUS that Toyota fans bash domestic followers who cite the new Fusion as a great car, ahead of Toyota and Nissan, saying "wow only one car did it!" And how it's "crap" and what not, where's the proof for this?

But then, it's the exact opposite when it comes to the new Tundra. The import followers swear by this ONE new Toyota truck saying its better than the competition because, well, it's a "Toyota and therefore its new and better."

Ironic, really.

The Fusion has been PROVEN better than the imports from many auto-review magazines, journalists, and current owners. But, Toyota enthusiasts blow it off as it's nothing.

The Tundra has been denoted off of Consumer Reports' recommended list, and has had numerous issues so far, and the Toyota followers STILL blow this denotation off as if it's nothing, and still claim it's the better truck hands down.

I'm sorry, but that's seriously faulted logic.

I spent a good majority of last week driving to dealerships of different makes. Chrysler, Ford, GM, Buick, Toyota, Nissan, Cadillac, Honda.

The Chrysler interior quality was dismal.

Almost all of the GM and Ford interior qualities of the interior were awesome, nice sturdy structure, soft touch surfaces, and excellent fit and finish. The new CTS blew my mind in this segment. That, is truly an amazing car and sets the benchmark for the segment in my opinion. The ones that were not so great were the GM small cars, particularly the Cobalt, Focus, Sebring, and the small Jeep SUVs.

The Toyota interior quality was quite bad, compared to the new domestics not including Chrysler. Seriously, seas of hard grainy plastics, and the inside of the Tundra was a horrible sight. They really aren't that great. I spotted a few misaligned panels on the inside of the Camry, Rav 4, and Sequoia.

The Honda cars were hit and miss. Odyssey had very good interior quality, the Accord did as well. The seats though they looked pleasant, sucked.

21:56, Sure, I'll explain it. Right after you explain why each of the Big 3 just finished begging for money to avoid bankruptcy...ha. You can say sales are down, but it stands to reason that you'd consider: down from where?? If Toyota sold a million cars last week and half a million the week, and GM sold 6 vehicles in the first week, and 5 the week after; yes, Toyota sales are down a higher percentage, but they're still in far better shape than GM.

That's the point you've obviously missed. Toyota sales may be down due to the economy, but they're still in perfect shape compared to Ford, GM, or Dodge. Because they make better vehicles. If not for GM begging for money, they wouldn't even be here next week. I'm only quoting from the CEO of their company, by the way.