2002 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - Off Topic Comments

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.

19:39 pretty much hits the nail on the head. Past reputations have nothing to do with current vehicles. Truth be known, imports were NEVER that good anyway. Millions of dollars in ad hype created a false impression.

As has been pointed out, the ONLY true criteria for assessing a vehicle's reliability is actual frequency of repair records. These have NOT been forthcoming. A subjective opinion means nothing without solid, verifiable data to support it. Provide some REAL data showing that Japanese vehicles ACTUALLY DO require less repairs and we might agree. That won't happen, because it just isn't so. If a vehicle goes 100,000 miles without a problem, in my book it is perfect and can't be improved upon. NOT ONE of our domestics has ever had a problem in 100,000 miles, so I really could care less about mythical 400,000 mile Toyotas. I WON'T be driving one.

15:22 comment "I will not allow you" Amazing that our lives are suddenly under control. At any rate at some point in time your very high mileage vehicle breakdown will become inevitable

If it is very costly as mine has been it may suddenly direct you to a newer one that may be significantly worse. I was shocked myself and now I switched entirely to domestics today.

Old cars were better import wise in our household. But not everyone wants to keep questionable high mile vehicles with aged components throughout. If I were single, just me, I would not have a big issue with that. But my wife and daughter are not driving 250,000 mile cars on remote rural roads either.

10:37 do you own a full size truck the subject of this review? Before I would even begin a comment, I would start with why I am reviewing a specific type of vehicle and the applications I might expect.

Reliability to what? Since this is a full size truck review, is there even going to be what you are spending your money on? I would hope over time we might escape the small car and small truck banter. I sincerely doubt a Camry owner has the same thoughts and opinions as a full size truck owner.

Anyone else on here that actually owns these vehicles and ones that I see on a regular basis typically discuss engine displacements, cooling, towing, load capabilities, ride, handling, features and new options available. It really doesn't get into small sedan discussions or even small trucks that are outclassed.

I guess I see it as what they cost new and what they must be able to do. These vehicles also get stressed with towing, loads not just loping around in overdrive in a small car. When you are spending over twice as much plus, you want to know a bit more about the utility factor, capability and certainly not settling for a real lousy warranty.

"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".

Yes and this is more proof that "Consumer Reports" takes their job seriously. THEY CHANGED THEIR POLICY. You can kinda understand if they considered 30 years of good performance suggestive of a trend. But when their formula failed they scrapped it. That's good science, folks.

Read the data for yourselves and remember that special use and heavier duty vehicles will have a higher incidence of repairs.

"As has been pointed out, the ONLY true criteria for assessing a vehicle's reliability is actual frequency of repair records. These have NOT been forthcoming. A subjective opinion means nothing without solid, verifiable data to support it. Provide some REAL data showing that Japanese vehicles ACTUALLY DO require less repairs and we might agree".

This is exactly what "Consumer Reports" provides. They break down their frequency of repair data into a number of categories. These categories are rated by symbols that represent a range of percentages of vehicles in the sample with problems in that area. The data isn't presented unless the sample size is sufficiently large.

Toyota had a very long stretch of reliable models so Consumer Reports started to base recommendations of new models upon old ones. In this they were caught by surprise. The new models of both the Camry 6cyl and the Tundra were rushed in their release and had flaws that were widespread enough to cause them to no longer be recommended. Because of this Consumer Reports (to their credit) no longer bases new model recommendations on the previous model's reliability. They refined their system... you can use that as a reason to discredit them or you can see it as a reason to believe in their willingness to change for the sake of accuracy. Either way... the data is valuable. Their research criteria, data filtering rules, and the compiled outcomes are all too long and complex for me to write here in a blog, but they are readily available in the annual auto issue that you should be able to get at most book stores. That is where you'll find the data that shows that many Japanese vehicles have fared better over time.

Recently GM themselves admitted that they had let their reliability fall "below industry standards". Who are we to argue with them. Rather we should cheer them on as they continue their quest to restore their reputation for building world class automobiles.

11:18 Again, all of that is your opinion, none of it was fact. As has been stated before, Consumer Reports IS based on frequency of repair records by owners, and those owners, nationwide, report less mechanical issues with Toyota's and Honda's. Again, fact.

All we continue to see from domestic owners is stories about how much they like their Fords.

You don't have to drive a Toyota, but those of us who want to drive automobiles from the top two most reliable makes (Toyota and Honda) will continue to drive them, knowing that (and able to provide facts to back it up).

There are two major problems with this truck that have shown up on Consumer Reports and Toyota recalls. The first is the brakes; the second is the ball joints (the troubles experienced by the current model hadn't happened yet). The overall vehicle still shows up reliable because, apart from these issues, other problems have been much more infrequent than in some of the competition.

Consumer Affairs' site would seem to be a wake up call except for a few interesting problems:

#1 They accept advertising -- notably from Chevrolet. The most reputable consumer organizations, in an effort to maintain absolute independence, do not.

#2 The Tundra seems to be the prime beneficiary of such a long list of complaints. The pickups from Ford and GM have also had trouble areas and recalls (note GM's quiet buy-back of trucks because of piston-slap). Yet there is very little owner commentary on the site by comparison.

#3 They say as the first words in their summary "Yes it's an ugly truck". Pejorative commentary from a supposedly objective organization is a strike against their objectivity --- Particularly when no objective data is made available to put suspicion to rest.

#4 Finally; even if all my suspicions about Consumer Affairs are baseless, the long list of Tundra complaints are still merely anecdotal evidence that could either reflect a poor vehicle or an anomaly that is allayed by large scale data. Most of the comments seem to be on target, though, for common problems in Tundras. The real question is; where are the similar complaints about 2006 Ford F150s dead on the side of the highway from computer trouble or the GM pickups with piston slap?

But be honest guys. You don't care about this stuff. You still wouldn't buy a Toyota truck even if it walked on water on a regular basis. You dislike it because it comes from Toyota -- strike one... no more strikes necessary. Ford, Chevy, or Dodge is tattooed on your soul. All else is just window dressing and a search for a rationale for what you already believe. You're entitled to your opinion and the method you used to arrive at it. But, really, its not as though you're going unrecognized here. You're a (insert Ford, Chevy or Dodge) guy. Enjoy your trucks.

7:09 be more specific what full size Honda truck are you referring to? So its wrong to discuss a non existent vehicle that is the topic of this specific review

#2 your comments say Toyota, so is that cars or the one large truck?... What defines the best when you buy a full size truck?

I will test drive any new full size truck and buy the best and I do. It happens to be now it's not a Tundra.

Work on the best as far as handling, ride, room, comfort and warranty. I could care less what it costs by the way, it's these critical elements that will bring my checkbook out.

I don't harp and complain, I actually buy after driving several. I find it a waste to time to go on and on over non related vehicles or even full size trucks as theory vs. acquiring a 2009. It's like looking at homes... I sell one and actively buy another. I do active research and then act.

Sit behind the wheel of one you just bought and add some first hand beneficial knowledge to us to us that buy. Its very vague and carlike on a full size truck review..... how about a specific make,model and full size truck year you are actively staying specifically on topic about.