Analyst Indicates The New Tundra is Alienating Truck Buyers

The problem with that argument is that US trucks (unlike cars) are some of the best built in the world. So the problem is the consumer in that market does not see the Toyota quality as an advantage.

Ford trucks fall apart?

I don't currently own a Ford, but beat the hell out of a 95' Ranger (175K miles) and then a 99'E250 van (100K miles) traveling Baja. I know a dozen other people who have done the same. Ford trucks are solid.

The domestics are just more competitive in trucks than they are with cars. I went to buy a Tundra in '01 because I liked Toyotas, but the sales guy was an *ss. Went next door to look at Silverados and instantly wondered why I ever liked the Tundra in the first place. That was my first domestic vehicle ever and six years later, I have had no problems other than off-road damage from jumping it. The new Tundra may be ugly, but I'm sure it's great otherwise. On problem is: Ford, GM, and Dodge care about this segment and offer solid products at a better value. That's what they should have been doing all along with cars.

Unlike the rest of their lineups, the american companies make the best trucks. Now if only they can use the passion and effort they put into their trucks and make better cars.

Ford is trying with their cars. Believe me I own a fusion and its a good vehicle. It may have some downsides but its better then other vehicles. Look a Milan and MKZ.The MKZ's interior is awarded for being better then the similar priced Lexus ES

It's not. Awards aren't public opinion... the MKZ's interior is plastic-land. ES350's interior is just as well-appointed as the GS's.

I feel that GM is putting forth a much better effort than Ford or Chrysler in terms of passenger cars. Their new crossovers leave the Edge/MKX in the dust, and the new Malibu is looking good. There's also the complete lineup of Cadillacs, which completely overshadow the "competing" Lincolns.

You might be right in some regards and have some points, but to classify the low end truck buyer as “small town hick” is showing how little you know about the typical truck buyer.

Simply put the entry model is way over priced for the intended market (about $3,000). For that buyer, they simply will not pay a premium for a quality level they don't think they need in the first place.

As far a squeaks and rattles over the long run that is to be determined after the vehicle is on the road for a while and would be pure speculation at this point.

However one observation that I have noted is: The domestics use a full box frame rail through out for added ruggedness to the undercarriage. The Tundra is a lower gauge "C" frame rail of lighter gauge construction in some portions. How this holds up over time is not yet clear, but at the limits of a full load, the C type frame rail will be more likely to flex under load. This lighter construction will also tend to flex on bumpy roads as well (farm roads and construction sites). So to the average buyer the Toyota may actually encounter rattles more due to a lighter construction technique.

These are all observations from someone that has actually looked under and through out the vehicle and compared it side by side, not gained his information from a magazine or a press release.

I feel Toyota will be successful with the bottom line model but only after a price adjustment to correct this models slow sales.

The rest of the lineup appears to be competitively priced and will probably sell well. I do firmly believe you will see a future upgrade to a full box construction of the Tundra at the next go round to cope with the greater demands that a professional user will encounter.

I think you're overstating how good Toyota trucks are relative to the competition. The small ones have always been durable and known all over the world. They have good resale value too. But, they are not perfect. The outgoing Tundra has not been very reliable (according to my friend who works on them for Toyota). He said avoid anything before 2003. And for the small trucks, the last generation model got really 'long in the tooth' at the end and it's resale value is only on-par with domestic full-size trucks. The older Toyotas rattle quite a bit and don't even offer the extra doors of their competition at the time. In terms of refinement, features, and capability, they are not as satisfying as many of the US trucks. They're getting there though, and I wouldn't bet against them. Just don't act like Ford, GM, and Dodge don't know their full-size customers better than Toyota.

I think you might have some facts confused here. Just because Toyota has solid cars (unibody) doesn't mean that they are able to directly apply the same techniques to a body on frame design. The frame has everything to do with build quality over a long duration. The torsional ridgidity of frame is crucial due to the fact that all the suspension loads (front and rear) are absorbed by the frame. True, attachment points to the cab are imporant, but I think your not giving credit where credit is due. Toyota cannot run away in this segment because the domestic trucks are just that good.

riceman, you sound like Khan of King of the Hill! lol!

I guess truck buyer haven't figured out the whole depreciation game yet?

The real reason Asian mftr.s have been so successful is because they share parts. Let me give you an example. Remember the CRX? It was a great selling car but Honda replaced it with the Del Sol, Why?... Because the Del Sol shared it's unibody with the Toyota Paseo and Mazda MX3. All companys do this to a certain extent. The Fusion uses the Mazda platform for the Fusion, but Ford owns Mazda. If you stripped the skin off fo a new Camry, Accord, and Altima I bet they all have the same unibody. The crime here is not revealing this to shareholders, if they are listed.

fordman, what are you smoking?

you KNOW the camry, accord, and altima are built by three DIFFERENT companies don't you? all in a dog-eat-dog COMPETITION with each other? all of which presumably, keep new designs/sheetmetal under TOP SECRET security until the molds must be made?

the companys may share common PARTS SUPPLIERS. no way do they share engineers, much less designers. MUCH less body shells.

Of course I know that you idiot; that's my whole point. The subframe accounts for thirty percent of a new car's cost. The more cars you can make off of the same platform the cheaper it is to biuld. Look at the doors on the new Tundra and then look at the doors on the Nissan Titan, they both curve downward at the back. Then do the same with the Japenese cars I mentioned. Or better yet, just compare Japenese pick-ups of the eightys. Look at how the new Civic and Scion coupe look alike. Sure they discise their test mules, each companydesigns htier own exteriors and intiriors, drivetrains etc. Go to a scrapyard and see for yourself!

You're wrong.

Go on doubt me ,since you wont have an open mind. But when it's revealed, remember, you heard it from me first!

"ricemaster" your posts have to be some of the most ignorant and misinformed posts i have ever seen on the internet. time to stop drinking the coolade and come up for air. the reason why GM and Ford sell a lot of pickups is easy.....they are very good vehicles. sure Toyota produces a nice vehicle but this fictional belief that everything Toyota will be bulletproof while everything domestic is junk is just plain ridiculous. GM and Ford know the truck market upside down and sideways. their buyers (which i am one) are discriminating and know a good vehicle when they see it and the sales numbers prove it. the refinement and quality in GM and Ford pickups is fantastic. Because mighty Toyota is getting their head handed to them in the full size truck segment you seem to believe that it is the buyers fault not Toyota's. what a joke.

fordman:

"The real reason Asian mftr.s have been so successful is because they share parts."


fordman, many detroit execs way smarter than you have had theories about "the real reason" asian mfgrs. are so successful.

like yours, they have tended to be SIMPLEMINDED theories and generally WRONG.

Apex, come on around the curve and you can see farther. Stop believing the liberal press and investigate these things for yourself. Sure Ford of North America is hurting but Ford "globaly" showed RECORD PROFITS last quarter and Ford is the best selling vehical in Russia. Their Quality IS on par with toyota but the anti capital- anti American press wont tell you that.I have read personal accounts of people getting two and three hundred thousand miles on the same engine. And I bet you did not know Mercedese- Benz has had the second worst quality rating in Europe and their rating over here is pretty bad too. I bet you didn't know toyota and honda, (notice no cap. letters... out of disrespect!) just had a major recal. the one for toyota still wont fix the ball joint problem-hence, an engineering problem they can't solve. Not that the domestics don't have problems,but usualy theirs are assembly line problems. honda's is bad engines-major recall. Look it up! And rival mitsubishi is on the skirts of bankruptcy.

if you believe the mainstream media is "liberal," and anti-capitalist and anti-american, your idea of "balanced" reportage must be what you hear from Flush Rimbaugh and Michael (Idiot) Savage.

the media are actually owned by conservative corporations, some of which like GE are part of the military industrial complex. what they report (and as important, DON'T report) SEEM liberal only to those from the far right.

i won't argue about the relative quality/reliability and profitability of the various car companies with you, as you seem only BARELY informed and rely on minor factoids of small significance.

i WILL advise you that a major reason the domestic car companies aren't doing so well, is because our very best engineers go to the better paying defense industries, unlike the case in japan and europe.

as a friend of mine said, "yeah the japanese make good cars. so what? they can't match the TANKS, missiles, planes and bombs WE make!"

Michael (Idiot) Savage


i call him that, because UNlike interesting and harmless idiot savants, savage is a neo-con ultra rightwing nut PROPAGANDIST. spreading harmful disinformation.

said he once: "Those treehugger scientists would have you believe that what happened on the Sun 93,000,000 million years ago is affecting the planet TODAY."

the idiot did not know the difference between MILES and LIGHT-YEARS. the Sun is actually only NINE light-MINUTES away. such is the MAGNITUDE of his IGNORANCE (and/or propagandizing)!

and YES, whatever happens on the Sun DOES affect Earth nine minutes later. but more often, hours or days later, as not all solar emanations travel at light speed.