2002 Toyota Tundra SR5 from North America - Off Topic Comments

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!!

11:48 How you can write such a long comment, yet be completely incorrect about the facts is beyond me.

I just left the J.D. Power website. As I knew already, Ford is (of course) rated LOWER in overall quality than Toyota...

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/

Thanks for the info. I haven't seen any sources lately that DON'T rank Ford as good or better than Toyota or Honda in reliability. Consumer Reports, J.D. Powers, USA Today, and most other sources and reviewers are coming out on the side of Ford. Japanese cars are losing ground, and FAST. USA Today alone has featured reviews in the past month bashing both Nissan and Toyota, and stating that the Ford Focus is a much better car and "more upscale" in feel than the Toyota. EVERYONE agrees that the Fusion is several notches above both the Camry and Accord in reliability.

It's becoming obvious that Japanese cars are not now, and in reality never have been anywhere near as good as the hype has made them out to be. We had Japanese cars made when they were SUPPOSED to be better (late 80's, early 90's). Ours weren't as reliable then as our Fords were. Today there is no comparison at all. Ford takes it hands down.

9:46... has a 7000 lb. pull plus with my 2 boats another factor to consider is tongue weight. There are a lot of people focused on "gas sippers" on here. I prefer a V8 with towing. Or better yet Diesel.

Heres some recommendations for the readers on here:

http://www.autotropolis.com/wiki/index.php?title=Top_10_Towing_Vehicles_for_2008

I found the best way is to look out in the parking lot at all the newer full size trucks with small and large trailers. I go to the massive new boat ramps and everyone is lined up and its lined with 1/2-3/4 ton with some even larger domestics. Everyone loves talking about their boats/trucks waiting and I ask there. Not from people trying to sell me one. If you do not tow or carry loads why buy a full size truck at all? And I suspect most on here do not own one to comprehend why they are bought on applications in 2009. I suspect we will hear about not needing a domestic dually or 1 ton truck. I agree with that in my case I prefer 3/4 ton no compromises on application or safety. Performs flawless and far better capability and warranty as well.

"has a 7000 lb. pull plus with my 2 boats another factor to consider is tongue weight. There are a lot of people focused on "gas sippers" on here. I prefer a V8 with towing. Or better yet Diesel.

Heres some recommendations for the readers on here:

http://www.autotropolis.com/wiki/index.php?title=Top_10_Towing_Vehicles_for_2008"

Thanks for the site. The tongue weight issue is significant but is mitigated somewhat by my weight distribution hitch. What pickup do you own? Right now I have a trailer but no reliable pickup to pull it with. So I'm looking toward the future. How long have you owned it? What problems have you had? Could they have been avoided? If so, how? When you tow, does your truck wander?

Thanks for any answers in advance. Obviously I'm not a Toyota basher since I'm a former owner, but my experience tells me that the Tundra needs a fair amount of beefing-up to pull heavier trailers.

"I just left the J.D. Power website. As I knew already, Ford is (of course) rated LOWER in overall quality than Toyota..."

Oh really?? Then I guess you somehow conveniently overlooked the Fusion (rated MUCH higher than the Camry) and the Mustang (rated tops over the Toyota Solara). I'm also sure you weren't aware that the 2007 Pontiac Grand Prix beat out the Toyota Avalon for "Best in class" in J.D. Powers rankings. Sounds a bit like VERY selective reading to me. Try reading comments 23:06, 17:11,17:48 and 16:28. Real data from real sources. In full size trucks NOTHING beats ANY domestic. That's fact, not opinion. Ask people who actually own and use trucks in their work. How many Tundras have you seen on construction sites?

J.D. Power rates Toyota below Ford (of course) in overall quality. It's that simple. As does any other source I've ever read. I guess if you want to buy a Ford and believe that it's as good, that's your decision.

23:06, Ahh...no. Sorry. In reality, the Japanese automobiles of the 80's and 90's were WORLDS ahead of all the domestics. Ford is beginning to at least close the gap a little, not nearly in the same league as a Toyota or a Honda of course, but closer. At least they're not complete junk now.

There is a BIG difference between INITIAL and LONG TERM reliability. All of you guys jumping all over that MSNBC/JD power article are getting a little too excited over the fact that they are indicating INITIAL quality. I could really care less about initial quality, which is a moot point anyway. What counts is long term reliability, which I'm sorry to once more point out is by far in Toyota's favor. Sorry - but Ford is NOT more reliable than Toyota in any shape, form, or fashion.

And in regards to this comment:

"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."

ALL automakers are having problems right now. But the reason isn't because US car makers are doing badly. The reason is that credit has dried up. But just to back up the boat for just a second, US car makers have been in trouble for a long time now, and well before the current economic crisis. GM and Ford have been losing market share not because they build fantastic cars that everyone wants, but because they build less and less that people want. Oh sure - they built loads of trucks and SUVs for sure. But they totally ignored their small and mid sized car lineups, with examples like the Cavalier, Taurus, and Escort being total jokes.

What it boils down too is really, really simple: The company with better products wins, and regardless of how you feel about it, success doesn't come from building poor products. Hence GM and Ford's eventual demise.

Lastly, Toyota will be around for a long time, so I will have a choice of what to drive. But I do enjoy a nice bike ride on occasion...