On Topic (60) | Off Topic (483) | All (543)
Comments: 1-15, 16-30, 31-45, 46-60
To 14:11, Toyota's aren't designed to be farm trucks that haul tree trunks and rocks. Maybe your dad made $20,000 dollars driving around with tree trunks and rocks in the back of his truck; somehow I don't often have the need to haul either. I might cut and split the tree trunk and haul a few loads of firewood, but I don't normally put the whole tree in my truck, in which case my Toyota does just fine, and will be running long after your Ford and Chevy, as 99% of all Toyota's do. As I said earlier, please drop the argument about the engines; Toyota engines are simply better, that's all there is to it.
Listen up: I'll tell you the reason why GM and Ford engines are better engines. Because they can be abused for decades and used for real work pulling multiple tons day after day and hardly ever, if ever having a break down.
They keep running for years with little or no over-hauling.
My C20 has been used since 1978 to do work, (it's not a commuter, it's a farm truck) the engines has never had to have anything done to it except a new $14.00 fuel pump and new spark-plugs and coil, which I, Mr. Mechanic am able to do myself.
Who would make an airplane's skin out of cast iron? The thing would weigh a million tons. It couldn't even leave the ground. The reason it's not used as much is because it's heavy and hard to work with. Has anyone ever tried drilling a hole into cast iron? Good luck. Hope you can afford many drill bits and a new drill.
Not only has my C20 been put through real tests, but my Grandfather had a 77 C10 custom deluxe that was given to him by my uncle. He neglected the thing and never changed the oil in it. I would dare say that if you tried draining the oil, it would come out like black pancake syrup because it was so thick. Yet, the 5.0L 305 would fire up every time. The only real problem it had, was the carburetor wasn't working correctly and the engine would stall when put into gear, until it warmed up. Besides that, it never gave any of my family members a single problem and it was bought new or near new. My grandfather gave it to another uncle of mine, whose kids drove it as a commuter vehicle daily which still never gave them any problems. Then they sold it to their neighbor who drives it daily and used it to pull a U-haul trailer over a 1000 mile round trip. That was just a couple of years ago. Still, it has never been broken down. My dad used the truck before he bought the C20 and never was let down by it. So it has had a long life of either farm work, neglect, or frequent transportation and never failed anyone.
I get so tired of explaining this stuff to you people. Your Tundra engines are never used to do any real work. Even if they are, you do not have the guarantee that they will last for 30 or 40 years doing that work.
These old Chevrolet engines have put in the time. They were not used as commuter vehicles with a bag of mulch in the back, they were used to haul anything from cattle, to tobacco, to wood, to round bails of hay, to tons of fertilizer.
After all that repetitious work, they never had any major break downs and are yet to have one. They have proven that they can be put through hell for 30 years or more and keep right on trucking. The 4.7 and 5.7 liter Tundra engines cannot claim this. They have not existed long enough and they definitely have not been used for anything. Anyone who has this kind of work to do wouldn't even touch one.
If you all would put-up or shut-up, you would see whether or not the Tundra engine or any other Toyota engine is durable. If you people would ever bother to do any real work, you would tear the things up. It doesn't matter how well aluminum weathers or how precise it is assembled, it is a weaker substance. Of course you will never do anything brutal so you will never know the difference.
If Toyota made a cast-iron engine, it would last longer than an aluminum after being abused. If Chevy made an aluminum 5.7L 350 in the old days, it would wear out faster than their 5.7L 350 cast-iron engines after being worked day after day.
You people will never see this because you people will never do anything with your trucks. You will never have the opportunity or need to haul or pull multiple tons of weight. If you ever did start doing this on a daily basis, your precision engine would be worn out in no time. Aluminum is weaker and less dense so it grinds down faster than cast iron. Try taking aluminum and cast-iron and sand on them or scrape on them and see which one grinds down faster.
The only reason the Tundra engine will not wear down that fast is because there will never be tons of resistance pulling on the vehicle in the other direction. Any engine will last longer without have to pull anything.
About those useless 70's Toyota pickups: They were puny the day they rolled off of the assembly line and incapable of doing anything real from the get-go. A 70's model domestic could haul 3000lbs in the bed and at the same time, pull 10,000 lbs behind it without hesitation. The 70's model Toyota's would be pushed to the limit just to pull a bass-fishing boat and haul a washing machine and dryer at the same time. Maybe their engines are still running today in other states because no one ever did anything with them through-out their lives. The 70's domestics were just about all bought and used for work (because people didn't buy trucks just to drive back then) and are still on the road today. The 70's model Toyota's were bought for efficiency or to save gas and couldn't do any real work, and I am yet to see one. I'm sure they're out there, but I'm also sure they weren't used for anything important.
You keep having to make predictions while I keep declaring numbers in both years and miles. If your Tundra engine is indeed going to out-last my Chevy engine, then you are going to have to wait until the year 2028 or later to actually make that call. (Even if it does out-last it, it would be because it was never used to do anything.)
If your Tundra engine is indeed going to out-last my Ford engine, then you are going to have to wait until the odometer says 260,000 miles to make that call. (Even if it does out-last it, it would be because it is a V-8 in a 4,500lbs chassis instead of a V-6 in a 5,000lbs chassis.)
It is definitely a lost cause, trying to make this Toyota lover understand that up until now, the Tundra has been a total joke of a full size truck. The verdict is still out on the new 07 model, but it sounds like it may be a better offering than the previous Tundra. If the Tundra was so great before, why the complete overhaul of this truck for 07??? I will tell you why, because they did not have a truck that could compete with the big 3, in any way, shape, or form. Heck, the Tundra was no more capable than a Dodge Dakota, let alone a full size offering from the big 3. How come it took Toyota 8 years to finally offer a larger motor??? If the 4.7 was so great, why now offer a 5.7??? Because the previous Tundra could not haul anything close to a big 3 truck, so they could not compete. The sales numbers do not lie, the Tundra has a long way to go to reach the volumes sold by the big 3. People who want to haul golf clubs buy a Tundra, while people who want something capable, buy from the big 3.
<<It is definitely a lost cause, trying to make this Toyota lover understand that up until now, the Tundra has been a total joke of a full size truck. The verdict is still out on the new 07 model, but it sounds like it may be a better offering than the previous Tundra. If the Tundra was so great before, why the complete overhaul of this truck for 07??? I will tell you why, because they did not have a truck that could compete with the big 3, in any way, shape, or form. Heck, the Tundra was no more capable than a Dodge Dakota, let alone a full size offering from the big 3. How come it took Toyota 8 years to finally offer a larger motor??? If the 4.7 was so great, why now offer a 5.7??? Because the previous Tundra could not haul anything close to a big 3 truck, so they could not compete. The sales numbers do not lie, the Tundra has a long way to go to reach the volumes sold by the big 3. People who want to haul golf clubs buy a Tundra, while people who want something capable, buy from the big 3.>.
Look, the whole Tundra thing had nothing to do with Toyota as far as NOT being able to make a good truck, it had to do with Japanese management. For years the Japanese did not understand the full size market in the US, both for cars and trucks. They got the cars (Lexus, Infiniti, Avalon, etc.) but still didn't understand trucks. Once they did, the yen exchange rate was too great for them to offer compatible vehicles for domestic prices.
Now that they both understand the market and are able to build the trucks cost effectively they have created a true competitor. Whether it will win the hearts and minds of truck buyers is another story, but according to BusinessWeek Ford is pretty scared. They even were going to run a commercial saying the guys who make the Toyota drive Ford trucks, something a confident leader would NEVER do. They ultimately pulled the ad.
Talk about Toyota's "reliability" doesn't impress me. In 41 years of driving the ONLY vehicle I've ever gotten stranded on the road in with mechanical trouble was a friend's Corolla with only 46,000 miles on it, and the only time my wife has ever been stuck on the road with car trouble was when her friend's NEARLY NEW Tercel broke down in rush hour traffic. NOT ONE of our 35+ domestics has EVER broken down on a trip, including one that had over 300,000 miles and a couple with well over 200,000 miles.
I just looked at the new Tundra, and I have to say I am impressed. It looks like they may have taken a few cues from Ford, though the new Tundra is still a far cry from an F-150 in overall quality. I'd still opt for the Ford, even though I never haul or tow anything. I'm still a little concerned about all the really major problems the Tundra has had and I'd want to be sure the new one has all the safety and reliability glitches worked out. I'm reading too many bad things about major safety issues with the Tundra to feel safe putting my family in one just yet. Several of my family members drive F-150's and they are very reliable and very safe vehicles.
Having test driven a V-8 Tundra extended cab and a Ford F-150 extended cab V-8, I'd take the Ford hands down. It was smoother, quieter in the cab, handled bumps better and had much more power. In addition, the F-150's luxurious and well-appointed interior makes the Tundras look incredibly cheap by comparison. In all fairness, the Tundra I drove was an '06. I hear the '07's have taken some cues from Ford and beefed up a little.
I wonder why they do not bash the F-250? Last night I parked my new Silverado next to a new Tundra. I normally do not base an opinion on strictly a visual, but you are immediately aware of how nicer a Silverado is. Heres my opinion and immediate observation. One walk around Tundras narrow chassis and looking in at its cheap interior immediately reaffirmed my wisdom. I remembered the test drive being the main reason I walked away. I suspect the majority of the comments are people that have not owned a new Ford or GM full size the past few years and are working their memories over antiquated domestics in comparison to today. I wonder how many commmenters in fact own a 2002 or new Tundra or a 2002 or newer full size domestic to offer a comparison? If you do not own this year or newer why comment unless you are commenting on world events that we can read just as well as yourself. If you are buying a newer vehicle 2002 to the present... please be aware that there are many older Toyota owners that haven't set their foot let alone owned a new Full size Ford F-250,Silverado SS etc. Remember Gas...Gas...Gas...and pensions... and drive both and then make a comment. Theres no way you will not notice the difference. But you would have to actually test a new domestic and have the resources to afford a higher end model. Mine is loaded and I am still upgrading its engine performance so maybe I expect a lot more than just getting around.
You stated that the new and OLD Tundra embarrassed the F-150 in every possible way!? REALLY NOW? You mean by having every single working component that made up its existance being weaker and of lesser quality? I'll give you ONE thing, the NEW Tundra can actually hold a chance against the domestic trucks, but there is one major thing they are lacking, A DIESEL. NOPE! not yet... let me ask you one thing, what parts of the ORIGINAL Tundra fully embarrassed the F-150? If you would like a breath of what the F-150 has to offer, here you go. A post from another review:
**********
"Tell me. Is the Tundra's little, thin frame superior to the F150's thick, fully boxed frame?
Is the Tundra's three or four thin cross-members superior to the F150's large and bulky cross-members which are welded through the sides of the frame rail? (This ensures that there is very little frame twist and flex. These trucks are solid over bumps.)
Is the Tundra's three 2.5" leaf springs superior to the F150's 3.0" wide leaf springs which can come between 3 or more amounts of springs per assembly?
Is the Tundra's skinny little front control arms superior to the F150's bulky, re-enforced control arms?
Is the Tundra's axle shafts (which are about the size of an average thumb) superior to the F150's axle shafts (which are about the size of an average wrist)?
Is the Tundra's "silky smoooooooth" engine with its aluminum components superior to the F150's cast iron engines?
Oh, but of course the Tundra rides smooooooooth. Whooooopee!
Oh, but of course the interior is soooooo pretty and luxerious. Whooooopee!
Yeah, that's what hard workers like Farmer's, construction workers, and contractors are all looking for when shopping for a truck: a smooth ride and a comfortable interior. Heaven knows they're not all looking for a heavy metal machine that can handle lots of abuse. Who needs that?
Now is the Tundra infinitely better? It sure isn't when people actually try to do work with them."
**********
SO, now that seeing MY post here was factual, and YOURS wasn't, would you like to for once offer factual information and parts to put the F-150 to shame? And I would like not to hear of Toyota's superior build quality that magically makes every single component stronger and better.
I went truck shopping this weekend and finally had a chance to look at a 2007 Tundra. I had steered clear of the earlier models because of all the problems owners were having with them. I was very impressed with the new Tundra. It appears that Toyota has taken a lot of cues from Ford and GM on this new model. However, after driving a Silverado, Dodge Ram and Ford F-150 I think Toyota still has a long way to go to catch up with any of the full-size domestics. I'm still undecided, but after watching the film (referred to earlier in the postings) and looking at all the negative stuff about the old Tundra (a lot of it from Tundra owners) I'm going to wait a while to see if all the mechanical and safety problems Toyota has been plagued with are still around in the new Tundra. In reading through all the TONS of comments on here, I have to say the domestic folks make much better arguments than the import owners do. Fact means more to me than impassioned ranting. I haven't seen any real, hard evidence from the Toyota fans.
Well that's fine, you couldn't pay me to swap my work F-150 or my Chevy for a futile Toyota. They are at least able to do work instead of just being treated like a car. As far as positive Tundra reviews being attacked, there are Ford and Chevy reviews on this site where a Toyota lover, without being provoked, puts in his input bashing domestics. It goes both ways.
I live in the northeast just had a large ice storm. The majority of all trucks I have seen today are F Series and Silverados 4wd carrying salt/sanders and plows on the front. Not one Tundra to be seen. I have never seen one with a plow. And I live in a heavily populated city. Lets focus on practical fully usable full size trucks... and no Tercels.
To 12:26; yeah, I DO expect my old, beat up trucks with over 250,000 to start and perform like new; that's why I drive Toyota's. They are capable of this, whereas the domestics aren't. That's the difference between the two; one WILL run well after 200 or 250 thousand miles (Toyota), and the rest (little 3) probably won't be running at all, and will have taken up residence in a scrapyard long before then.
Sorry if your domestics can't do that. At least 99 out of 100 won't. To be fair, a couple of domestic trucks have done it often: Dodge's 318 has been an excellent engine. Ford and Chevy though? Don't make me laugh. O.k., MAYBE some of the Ford diesels. But an F-150 or a Silverado? Junk, and junk. Always have been.
I agree about the overzealous Jesus comment. One comment can actually destroy credibility, but not here.
There are too many reasons to buy a domestic. Better load carrying, people carrying, towing capacity, better warranty, better cost per mile to own, equivalent highway mileage with a bigger more powerful engine and this is just on the F Series.
I do not drive a stock portfolio, or plant restructuring, or a vehicle based on politics. I drive a vehicle that I test drove thoroughly,did research and tested all full sizes not pulling into one car co. and being naive. I buy a vehicle with features and one that performs and is less expensive to own and drive over a 5 year period.
Apparently there are highly detailed technical comparisons such as this by many domestic owners. If you read carefully you see these detailed technical specs. Apparently this logic translates into sales as the majority of full size truck owners in American want solidified reasons and want a fully usable vehicle. I have yet to hear anything other than compromises with import owners.
It makes more sense to own a car if you cannot use a full size pickups capabilities. If you want to carry 3 or 4 bags of mulch it seems more plausible to go entirely with a economy car and tie down the trunk lid...
Comment 13:23 makes an excellent point. You WON'T see Tundras with snow plows or hauling sand like the Silverado, F-150 or Ram pickups. They are not full-size trucks and simply aren't made for real world usage other than hauling groceries or gardening supplies. That's why there are no Tundra work trucks on construction sites. The new '07 is a step in the right direction (it copied a LOT from Ford) but it remains to be seen if it has overcome the massive reliability problems of the first generation Tundras.