$8000 Rebate on Tundra

[K.C.]

I think you are combining a story about an airplane with Honda execs worried about the then upcoming Lambda SUV's and a Toyota exec saying the new Sequoia is possibly too large

Yeah, because we all know that Camino combines stories for his own gain.

I heard a Toyota exec say that the new Sequoia is too large. You'd think that an automaker as in tuned to the market as Toyota would not make an overly large, overly thirsty new full size SUV with very little, if any, fuel saving advantages.

The "Toyota quality" can be brought up time and time again, but the real world quality I have seen on both my former in laws Tundra (2004) and Avalon Limited (2006). The Tundra has interior pieces falling off, and has been in the shop 12 different times for unscheduled maintenance, including leaving my former pop-in-law and mom-in-law stranded on the highway three separate times. The Avalon has been better, its only left them stranded twice. It has had some interior trim pieces fall off as well, most notably the door that covers the stereo controls. The Navigation system has also failed them as has the laser cruise control that about ran them into the back of an 18-wheeler when it malfunctioned.

On top of this, their dealer experience has been horrendous where the failings of both vehicles has been their fault, and not the fault of the workmanship of its maker. They have had to fight to get these issues taken care of.

And who recommended the Toyota Tundra and Avalon to them? Consumer Reports did.

[plane]

the non-D4-S GR engine family has posted the best fuel economy in every comparision I've seen them in.

Would be happy to take a look at those comparisons if you have links.

Base Truck Comparison - EPA Ratings.

Chevrolet -

4.8L V-8

295 hp@5600 rpms

305 lbft@4800 rpms

16/20

Toyota

4.0L V-6

236 hp@5200 rpms

266 lbft@4000 rpms

17/20

59 horsepower and 39 lbft torque are an awful lot to give up for just 1 mpg in the city.

Because the 4.0 is much newer, it should have been more competitive.

Given a choice between the two, the 4.8L seems to be the logical choice.

Edited September 2, 2007 by plane

[thegriffon]

None of you are being honest and objective.

Accurate information on rebates offered by Toyota is practically impossible to find, no matter where you look. Edmunds is wrong, Toyota does not specify, and dealers are all over the place, if they mention it at all.

The Sierra, Silverado and F150 etc. are established vehicles with essentially peak market share. If there is a truck buyer to be had, they already ave them. Any market share gains are going to be minor unless one of them gets it seriously wrong. Thus sales fluctuations are primarily due to the over-riding demand for large pickups. This has in recent months been in freefall due the housing downturn and credit crisis in the US market, which affects the basic demand—individuals and businesses have less work and a harder time getting credit to buy new trucks. It has nothing to do with Tundra. Of course with the traditional market slowing down so much, every sale is critical, even to non-core buyers who just want a big family vehicle which can tow and may be looking at SUVs, minivans and crossovers as well. So everyone is offering large rebates in this segment, just to stay even (of course some are offering larger incentives than others. Toyota can of course afford to lose money large pickups, GM can't. GM too carrys a larger inventory to cater to the specific whims of individual customers, while Toyota previously expected people to choose a truck from what was on hand and be happy about it (Toyota has acknowledged that pickup buyers used to getting what they want from the big 3 are not happy with having to compromise) but this means that when demand falls there is a commensurately larger supply compared to demand. Rather than offer $8000 ebates, they are cutting production.

Tundra however is essentially a brand-new product as a competitive large pickup. Sales had no-where to go but up. It doesn't matter how the overall market for pickups is going, because Toyota wasn't really part of it before. It doesn't mean that the Tundra is doing better than the Silverado or Sierra, it means the new Tundra is doing better than the old Tundra. Toyota is benefiting from being essentially a new entry (despite what CR thinks—in fact it may be a reflection on how poorly the old Tundra was doing that even CR doesn't know it was a completely different product), that has yet to find its natural level. Of course it doesn't hurt that the Tundra's half-ton segment is less affected by the downturn than 3/4 and 1-ton pickups offered by the domestics. Until it finds it's natural level a downturn in overall segment sales will not appear to impact as much on the Tundra as it has on the 4Runner (sales of which are collapsing just as much as those of the domestic midsize SUVs), since no-one knows what they would have been without the downturn. Now is the Tundra's natural level above the Sierra (which it already outsells, in total, in recent months)? Probably. In fact it is probably above the Ram as well. It will be a very long time indeed before it can come close to matching the Silverado or F-150 though (15-20 years at least, by which time Toyota may decide the market isn't worth the investment required—if Tundra does come close to the Silverado the CAFE burden alone will be an enormous additional cost to Toyota. If Toyota isn't concerned about the Tundra's fuel economy now, they will be then). The latter have an enormous entrenched position that even a superior product will find almost insurmountable (how else does the ancient Econoline keep outselling the Savana, let alone the Express). Pickup buyers are loyal, none more so than upfitters and coachbuilders which drive a large portion of the market and which cannot change trucks without major changes to their own products (generational changes are by comparison minor and often supported by the truck manufacturers). It doesn't matter if a competitor has a far better product.

[thegriffon]

Would be happy to take a look at those comparisons if you have links.

Base Truck Comparison - EPA Ratings.

Chevrolet -

4.8L V-8

295 hp@5600 rpms

305 lbft@4800 rpms

16/20

Toyota

4.0L V-8

236 hp@5200 rpms

266 lbft@4000 rpms

17/20

59 horsepower and 39 lbft torque are an awful lot to give up for just 1 mpg in the city.

Because the 4.0 is much newer, it should have been more competitive.

Given a choice between the two, the 4.8L seems to be the logical choice.

Ahh, there's the problem, Toyota doesn't have a 4.0 L V8. It's a 4.7 L V8 and a 4.0 V6.

[Northstar]

You can get a SR5 5.7L double cab for $269/month? Wow.

[Camino LS6]

The Griffon is, of course, correct.

[regfootball]

lots of $h! flying around here but the bottom line is the turd isn't selling at all what they want, until toyota gashes the price. so it is only selling on price, which is exactly what domestic cars get lambasted for. its not the product that is driving desire to rush in and buy one, supposedly like all the other toyota products.

toyota has the ability to cut prices to the bone, because they cannot screw up their investment in the plant and they want to buy market share.

it is clear they have made the decision, customer be damned, resale will take a backseat to market share and keeping production going.

SOund familiar?

It is clear the Turd is not a desirable vehicle. C/D would have to give it a zero in the 'gotta have it category' judging by the price gashing.

Makes sense, you're not gonna pony up top dollar for something that is not class leading, for something that is not as safe, gives hints to being flimsy in spots, has a history of self destructing motors, and has no design appeal.

The economy ain't getting any hope till Jan 09 so this may be a long rocky road for GM and Ford because Toyota has all that interest free money from the BOJ and plenty of currency manipulation to do between now and then to entrench themselves to go as low as they want with pricing and they won't give a damn if you already bought one so far.

Last I checked, any car or truck was a bad investment.....cars are an EXPENSE....althought the myth of toyota as an unbreakable investment may come back to bite them in the ass on this one if too many motors sludge up or if the camshafts keep separating internally and sending scrapnel through the firewall, or if we see extraordinarily high injury counts from people in accidents who could have had better crash protection in stead of a compromised unboxed frame that saved the toyota company a couple dollars.

As for the FJ, with a little luck, the failing frames will be exposed and make people start to think twice about toyota being perfect. I think only MN bridges seem to fail more than FJ cruisers lately.......

the other funny thing is how many used turds i see on online listings and in the paper. i think some are buying them and finding out quickly they made a crucial mistake.

Edited September 2, 2007 by regfootball

[daves87rs]

I think you are combining a story about an airplane with Honda execs worried about the then upcoming Lambda SUV's and a Toyota exec saying the new Sequoia is possibly too large

I'm guessing you don't read that paper, then?

I know it's an old story, but it has but been out there a while...

[plane]

Ahh, there's the problem, Toyota doesn't have a 4.0 L V8. It's a 4.7 L V8 and a 4.0 V6.

Fixed. Thanks.

The point remains that the 4.0, one of Toyota's newest engines, provides far less power with fuel economy equivalent to a dated GM product.

Just an honest and objective comparison.

[daves87rs]

None of you are being honest and objective.

Accurate information on rebates offered by Toyota is practically impossible to find, no matter where you look. Edmunds is wrong, Toyota does not specify, and dealers are all over the place, if they mention it at all.

The Sierra, Silverado and F150 etc. are established vehicles with essentially peak market share. If there is a truck buyer to be had, they already ave them. Any market share gains are going to be minor unless one of them gets it seriously wrong. Thus sales fluctuations are primarily due to the over-riding demand for large pickups. This has in recent months been in freefall due the housing downturn and credit crisis in the US market, which affects the basic demand—individuals and businesses have less work and a harder time getting credit to buy new trucks. It has nothing to do with Tundra. Of course with the traditional market slowing down so much, every sale is critical, even to non-core buyers who just want a big family vehicle which can tow and may be looking at SUVs, minivans and crossovers as well. So everyone is offering large rebates in this segment, just to stay even (of course some are offering larger incentives than others. Toyota can of course afford to lose money large pickups, GM can't. GM too carrys a larger inventory to cater to the specific whims of individual customers, while Toyota previously expected people to choose a truck from what was on hand and be happy about it (Toyota has acknowledged that pickup buyers used to getting what they want from the big 3 are not happy with having to compromise) but this means that when demand falls there is a commensurately larger supply compared to demand. Rather than offer $8000 ebates, they are cutting production.

Tundra however is essentially a brand-new product as a competitive large pickup. Sales had no-where to go but up. It doesn't matter how the overall market for pickups is going, because Toyota wasn't really part of it before. It doesn't mean that the Tundra is doing better than the Silverado or Sierra, it means the new Tundra is doing better than the old Tundra. Toyota is benefiting from being essentially a new entry (despite what CR thinks—in fact it may be a reflection on how poorly the old Tundra was doing that even CR doesn't know it was a completely different product), that has yet to find its natural level. Of course it doesn't hurt that the Tundra's half-ton segment is less affected by the downturn than 3/4 and 1-ton pickups offered by the domestics. Until it finds it's natural level a downturn in overall segment sales will not appear to impact as much on the Tundra as it has on the 4Runner (sales of which are collapsing just as much as those of the domestic midsize SUVs), since no-one knows what they would have been without the downturn. Now is the Tundra's natural level above the Sierra (which it already outsells, in total, in recent months)? Probably. In fact it is probably above the Ram as well. It will be a very long time indeed before it can come close to matching the Silverado or F-150 though (15-20 years at least, by which time Toyota may decide the market isn't worth the investment required—if Tundra does come close to the Silverado the CAFE burden alone will be an enormous additional cost to Toyota. If Toyota isn't concerned about the Tundra's fuel economy now, they will be then). The latter have an enormous entrenched position that even a superior product will find almost insurmountable (how else does the ancient Econoline keep outselling the Savana, let alone the Express). Pickup buyers are loyal, none more so than upfitters and coachbuilders which drive a large portion of the market and which cannot change trucks without major changes to their own products (generational changes are by comparison minor and often supported by the truck manufacturers). It doesn't matter if a competitor has a far better product.

I don't think I could have said it better myself....

Then again-gas prices are going to drive the casual driver right out of the market....

Which will pound the big three hard, while toyota could let the tundra fall flat on its face (while putting money into their cars)

and just let it go...

heck, they could just drop the tundra all together and come out with a new truck...

While the Tundra isn't really that great of a truck (I've actually driven it), the market still could favor Toyota as the market shifts from gas prices.....

If the truck market takes a majot hit-Toyota will not feel the hit anywhere as hard as the big 3....

While I see the point of Toyoguy and BCGB- Toyota has yet to make a majot impact-which may or may not work in their favor.....

Then again-I can't see gas prices going much higher without causing a major recession, but that's another story for another thread.....

[daves87rs]

Ouch-you can get a F-150 for 199/month, but then again there are a truckload of f-150s out there...

[daves87rs]

True...it's a GM fansite...and that's why I'm on here too.

HOWEVER, I consider myself an automotive enthusiast across the board.....and therefore tend to look at things on a larger scale than just my enthusiasm for all things GM.

In NO WAY is Tundra "substandard." You may not like the vehicle....and that's fine. But I tend to think the truck is quite attractive and aggressive....seems to have a robust powertrain....and an interior that is stylish and unique (if not necessarily better than GM's entries.)

We'll see how well your "stinker" does at the end of the year. Somehow, I think Toyota's executives will be more than satisfied......

Yes and no.

I agree with the first few parts...

While I think the truck is ok (not that impressive), as it is a matter of opinion......

But I don't see the "stinker" doing that great....they aren't happy overseas if good money is not being made...

[Intrepidation]

For the record, edmunds liked the Silverado better overall than the Tundra, but the Tundra won because of it's superior powertrain (in terms of performance, not necessarily reliability).

thegriffen is spot on with his post and there isn't much more that needs to be said.

[FAPTurbo]

I've seen quite a few Tundra's in my area, and although I'm not too impressed with what is essentially just another truck, it's kind of grown one me...

Please don't kill me.

[enzl]

Toyota is just doing what they've always done, only in a new segment...

It's an avg-above average product with the likelihood being it won't break soon.

And they're willing to sell it at cost to carve out a solid piece of the market.

Everything else is just detail....

[Satty]

Have any of you driven a Tundra? They're not terrible, I haven't driven a GMT-900. so I cantcompare, but I was impressed by the short drive I took in a Tundra. Honestly, I only took the drive because they were giving away Bass Pro gift cards with a test drive and I needed a new paddle for my kayak, but the truck isn't bad and I would have no problem recommending it.

[PurdueGuy]

As for the FJ, with a little luck, the failing frames will be exposed and make people start to think twice about toyota being perfect. I think only MN bridges seem to fail more than FJ cruisers lately.......

It's not the frame on the FJs, it's the inner part of the body around the engine bay. With enough damage, the fender will shove into the door, wedging it shut.

[K.C.]

I recently test drove one for a $50 gift card to Cabelas. The 5.7 liter engine is powerful, and the transmission is very smooth. I thought the ride was a bit too rough (like the Titan). I also thought the nearly $50K price for a half ton truck was a big steep, especially for one that shocked me with the squeaks and rattles and this truck had. I was very disappointed in that, as well as the climate and stereo controls that were too far away from the driver. The door handles had a very flimsy feel on them as well, something that the 07 Silverado/Sierra share (but thats been fixed for 08 as I recently found out) The room in the CrewMax is huge, a homeless man could live back there and be in hog heaven.

I have driven a new Silverado and Sierra as well, and although the one I drove was the Flex Fuel 5.3L, I can't compare the power of the two vehicles since the Silverado I drove. The two GM trucks I drove (both top line LTZ/SLT crew cabs) did not squeak or rattle when going over bumps, and I thought the ride was far superior, and the controls for the radio/HVAC were close to the driver. The prices for the trucks I drove were $41K for the Silverado and $42K for the Sierra. I also felt the redundant controls on the steering wheel were easier to use, despite the fact that there are more of them.

Of all the things I look for in a truck, the GM trucks come out ahead because they offer similar capability in what I need them for, but I cannot stand a vehicle that squeaks and rattles when it is new, especially one with a steep price of near $50K, and with the experience that a few people I know have had with Toyotas, I am leary of their real world quality and reliability.

[ToniCipriani]

another fact

GM cut 1000 workers or the third shift at their Oshawa truck two days ago.

True but this has nothing to do with truck sales. It's a cut planned 2 years ago to cut benefits.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

did you even visit the dealer's website, they even list Tundra's incentive there.

FOG as a matter of fact the Tundra's rebates are smaller than GM's.

so here are some FACTs

Toyota gives $3000 cash

GM gives $3500 or $4000 in cash

Bull$h!. I saw another ad today about the $5000 factory rebate on the SR5 with the sport package.

another fact

GM cut 1000 workers or the third shift at their Oshawa truck two days ago.

GM also has more than one plant cranking out the Silverado and Sierra.

last July sales

Silverado sales were off 26.5% (46,997)

Avalance sales were off 35.4% (4,164)

Sierra sales were off 27.9% (15,892)

last June

Silverado sales were off 26.4% (44,955)

Avalanche sales were off 16.5% (4,327)

Sierra sales were off 29.2% (15,187)

And this is supposed to be news given the way the market is and has been going for the past 2-3 years? Gas is at record levels, the housing market sucks and driving a truck seems to have acquired more of a stigma than some would like.

here are what Tundra sales have been like since it went on sale, notice a trend

Feb 9,669

Mar 13,196

Apr 14,200

May 17,727

June 21,727

July 23,150

Umm... Ramp up? And I'm sure the correlation with Tundra incentives shows the same upward trend.

did you really the average truck buyer cares about:

3 videos released by Ford

a Toyota exec saying a small number of camshafts were failing

a safety rating when 5000lb vehicle is run into a solid wall

LOL, probably not, because they're too ignorant to pull their heads out of their asses anyway. Did I post any of that?!?! Nope.

oh and from my experience I was down in Houston a week ago, I encountered the Tundra about 4 (probably 6 times) more frequently than the GMT-900 pickups

Standing outside of the plant doesn't count.... (Yeah, I know it's in San Antonio--Take it for how I mean it to be said)

here in west Texas the Tundra is about 1/3 as popular for now. In the next 6mo I expect to be seeing the Tundra as often as the GMT-900 pickups

Which is basically IMPOSSIBLE since Toyota can't match the volume of GM trucks; but whatever.

Anyway; that was a big waste of time.... So...

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

yeah they are 5000 units away from outselling the Dodge Ram which has a $6000 rebate on it.

Or 0% for 60months

They're SERIOUSLY that far away from outselling such an outdated truck?!?! That's enough of a clue right there to tell you that something is amiss with the Turdra.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

"Import minded?" What is this the 1980s? The word "import" is so outdated when talking about cars it sounds like something that belongs in an old Chrysler ad.

Oh no... There you go breaking out that bad ass SoCal trendiness on us again.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

you can tell that to Toyota who saw net profit increase 32% last quarter.

You'd better pray that they continue to see that increase if they want to keep buying share. $8000 incentives in the first year will multiply dramatically by the end of the product cycle.

Hmmmm......let's all look at what happened to the midsize market today compared to, oh say, 30 years ago?

Umm. 30 years ago would've been 1977. And had I been alive and witnessed first hand the $h! that Detroit was trying to pass off as good product, I would've predicted it with ease.

I'm not saying Toyota is going to magically outsell Silverado or F-150.....but all of you taking the Tundra TODAY with a grain of salt are making a big mistake....remember Toyota's business plan never counted on outselling Silverado and F-150.....

I never did take it with a grain or salt... In fact; I'm the one predicting gloom and doom for Detroit on the back of the Turdra.

Furthermore....Plane....your "comments" about the Tundra speak of bias and bashing.....

LOL... You're kidding right?!?! After listening to you talk out the other end of your body about how the Malibu sucks when you haven't even seen one. And then realizing that this is a GM board that you consistently trash GM on. I'd talk about bias! But then again, that is the accepted practice among virtually everyone now; talk $h! about Detroit, but god forbid anyone expose BAD NEWS about the almighty Toyota or Japan.

What's funny is that you people almost have me convinced that you HONESTLY can't see past the end of your noses far enough to realize your own bias... It's a sad day indeed, I mean, you bet your ass I'm biased, but at least I'm smart enough to realize it and admit it.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

None of you are being honest and objective.

Accurate information on rebates offered by Toyota is practically impossible to find, no matter where you look. Edmunds is wrong, Toyota does not specify, and dealers are all over the place, if they mention it at all.

The Sierra, Silverado and F150 etc. are established vehicles with essentially peak market share. If there is a truck buyer to be had, they already ave them. Any market share gains are going to be minor unless one of them gets it seriously wrong. Thus sales fluctuations are primarily due to the over-riding demand for large pickups. This has in recent months been in freefall due the housing downturn and credit crisis in the US market, which affects the basic demand—individuals and businesses have less work and a harder time getting credit to buy new trucks. It has nothing to do with Tundra. Of course with the traditional market slowing down so much, every sale is critical, even to non-core buyers who just want a big family vehicle which can tow and may be looking at SUVs, minivans and crossovers as well. So everyone is offering large rebates in this segment, just to stay even (of course some are offering larger incentives than others. Toyota can of course afford to lose money large pickups, GM can't. GM too carrys a larger inventory to cater to the specific whims of individual customers, while Toyota previously expected people to choose a truck from what was on hand and be happy about it (Toyota has acknowledged that pickup buyers used to getting what they want from the big 3 are not happy with having to compromise) but this means that when demand falls there is a commensurately larger supply compared to demand. Rather than offer $8000 ebates, they are cutting production.

Tundra however is essentially a brand-new product as a competitive large pickup. Sales had no-where to go but up. It doesn't matter how the overall market for pickups is going, because Toyota wasn't really part of it before. It doesn't mean that the Tundra is doing better than the Silverado or Sierra, it means the new Tundra is doing better than the old Tundra. Toyota is benefiting from being essentially a new entry (despite what CR thinks—in fact it may be a reflection on how poorly the old Tundra was doing that even CR doesn't know it was a completely different product), that has yet to find its natural level. Of course it doesn't hurt that the Tundra's half-ton segment is less affected by the downturn than 3/4 and 1-ton pickups offered by the domestics. Until it finds it's natural level a downturn in overall segment sales will not appear to impact as much on the Tundra as it has on the 4Runner (sales of which are collapsing just as much as those of the domestic midsize SUVs), since no-one knows what they would have been without the downturn. Now is the Tundra's natural level above the Sierra (which it already outsells, in total, in recent months)? Probably. In fact it is probably above the Ram as well. It will be a very long time indeed before it can come close to matching the Silverado or F-150 though (15-20 years at least, by which time Toyota may decide the market isn't worth the investment required—if Tundra does come close to the Silverado the CAFE burden alone will be an enormous additional cost to Toyota. If Toyota isn't concerned about the Tundra's fuel economy now, they will be then). The latter have an enormous entrenched position that even a superior product will find almost insurmountable (how else does the ancient Econoline keep outselling the Savana, let alone the Express). Pickup buyers are loyal, none more so than upfitters and coachbuilders which drive a large portion of the market and which cannot change trucks without major changes to their own products (generational changes are by comparison minor and often supported by the truck manufacturers). It doesn't matter if a competitor has a far better product.

This is why I have A LOT of respect for thegriffon. As always, his post is spot on.

We'll see how well your "stinker" does at the end of the year. Somehow, I think Toyota's executives will be more than satisfied......

Naturally they'll sell to their goal or close simply because 1) The goal isn't that hard to achieve and 2) They'll manipulate the market with incentives. Then we'll get to hear all of the regurgitated Toyota PR media hoopla about how the Turdra is such an excellent seller

[toyoguy]

Bull$h!. I saw another ad today about the $5000 factory rebate on the SR5 with the sport package.

You saw an ad? edmunds for years has hired people to find out invoice prices and manufacture incentives.

and anyways the dealer had the factory rebate right on their website.

You'd better pray that they continue to see that increase if they want to keep buying share. $8000 incentives in the first year will multiply dramatically by the end of the product cycle.

why would I pray for that? So Toyota's profits are up 32% and all while they are spending $8000 to sell trucks?

the Tundra isn't anywhere near as profitable as the Silverado/Sierra but that hardly means they are losing money.

Umm... Ramp up? And I'm sure the correlation with Tundra incentives shows the same upward trend.

August incentives are fall below July's so wait till Tuesday's sales data for the answer.

They're SERIOUSLY that far away from outselling such an outdated truck?!?! That's enough of a clue right there to tell you that something is amiss with the Turdra.

At this point Dodge is practically paying people to take their truck, I highly doubt it is turning much of a profit these days. If I were Dodge I'd wish I were selling the Tundra

Edited September 3, 2007 by toyoguy

[Intrepidation]

At this point Dodge is practically paying people to take their truck, I highly doubt it is turning much of a profit these days. If I were Dodge I'd wish I were selling the Tundra

Dodge wouldn't want the Tundra's quality problems.

Edited September 3, 2007 by Dodgefan

[FloydHendershot]

Hmmmm......let's all look at what happened to the midsize market today compared to, oh say, 30 years ago?

Who would have ever thought that Toyota and Honda would RULE the midsize sedan segment?

I'm not saying Toyota is going to magically outsell Silverado or F-150.....but all of you taking the Tundra TODAY with a grain of salt are making a big mistake....remember Toyota's business plan never counted on outselling Silverado and F-150.....

Furthermore....Plane....your "comments" about the Tundra speak of bias and bashing.....

The question remains does Toyota have enough to focus on all fronts and maintain their so valuable reputation? Perhaps anectdotal but msn and yahoo autos aren't excactly brimming with satisfied camry buyers. Look for yourself.

Are sacrifices being made in order for quantity to replace quality. Sounds like maybe 30 years ago in more than one way.

When will this Toyota craze peak? What will be the defining moment that starts to turn people away or has it already begun?

[Drew Dowdell]

In NO WAY is Tundra "substandard."

snapping camshafts and dancing truckbed isn't substandard? Did you watch that video that was posted?

Remember that the "standard" for trucks these days is the F-150 and Silverado. In interior alone the Silverado has the Tundra beat simply for not having a stupid two part center stack.

[Intrepidation]

snapping camshafts, timing belts, and dancing truckbed isn't substandard? Did you watch that video that was posted?

Fixed

[Drew Dowdell]

Dodge wouldn't want the Tundra's quality problems.

If that isn't an insult right there I don't know what is.

[Intrepidation]

If that isn't an insult right there I don't know what is.

[mustang84]

The question remains does Toyota have enough to focus on all fronts and maintain their so valuable reputation? Perhaps anectdotal but msn and yahoo autos aren't excactly brimming with satisfied camry buyers. Look for yourself.

One thing that is funny is how the expert review score for the Camry is higher than the actual user reviews, and vice versa for GM and Ford (user higher than expert).

Quick comparison:

Expert / User

Impala 8.0 / 9.3

Fusion 8.0 / 9.1

Taurus 8.0 / 9.3

G6 8.0 / 8.4

Camry 9.0 / 7.3

There's some real venom being spit at the Camry and Tundra over at MSN Autos.

[gm4life]

Take a look at yahoo autos, but everyone seems to love the Turd the Camry and Avalon are a different story.

[regfootball]

One thing that is funny is how the expert review score for the Camry is higher than the actual user reviews, and vice versa for GM and Ford (user higher than expert).

Quick comparison:

Expert / User

Impala 8.0 / 9.3

Fusion 8.0 / 9.1

Taurus 8.0 / 9.3

G6 8.0 / 8.4

Camry 9.0 / 7.3

There's some real venom being spit at the Camry and Tundra over at MSN Autos.

that is the most telling of all. toyo humpers will argue, what is the user rating after 12 years and 326,000 miles?

as if-

to me, the car has 5 years to prove itself. anyone who expects a car to function as new without repair from year 5 or so on is being unrealistic. where camry fails is in year one!

domestics typically get extremely high user ratings. the press seems to ignore that however, as if to suggest real people don't matter.

edge 8.3/9.0

MKz 8.0/9.7

Edited September 3, 2007 by regfootball

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

At this point Dodge is practically paying people to take their truck, I highly doubt it is turning much of a profit these days. If I were Dodge I'd wish I were selling the Tundra

Last time I checked; $8K rebates = giving trucks away as well... maybe Dodge and Toyota should team up to bring some serious heat to the pick up market. After all, quality is about the same and Dodge actually knows how to build a real truck!

You saw an ad?

Yes... What's your point?

One thing that is funny is how the expert review score for the Camry is higher than the actual user reviews, and vice versa for GM and Ford (user higher than expert).

Further correlational data for the media bias argument.

domestics typically get extremely high user ratings. the press seems to ignore that however, as if to suggest real people don't matter

They don't... Only the uber-ignorantl trendsetters do (You know, the ones who buy import before even CONSIDERING domestic... The same people who will bitch about fuel prices yet drive across town to over pay for a cup of coffee or a "designer" outfit)

Edited September 4, 2007 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[Intrepidation]

Last time I checked; $8K rebates = giving trucks away as well... maybe Dodge and Toyota should team up to bring some serious heat to the pick up market. After all, quality is about the same and Dodge actually knows how to build a real truck!

Last time I checked the Ram didn't have exploding camshafts or use timing belts. Also The press even gives the Ram higher praise in the interior department. Don't forget it is the oldest pickup on the market.

[grandmarquis]

So what if the dealer offers a huge cash-back incentive?

That's not the same as a manufacturer's rebate.....

Uhhh, you may wanna rethink your silly notion. How long do ya 'spose any dealer will stay in business if they hafta bribe every Turdra buyer with $8,000.00? Hmmm? Duh, gee, ya think Toyopet may, just MAY, be backing them up? HMMMMM? Can you say "dumping"?

[Northstar]

So what if the dealer offers a huge cash-back incentive?

That's not the same as a manufacturer's rebate.....

If there is a combined $8k back on the truck obviously it's not selling. You don't see GM dealers giving $4k back on Lambdas just because they want to. Same for a Toyota dealer, they're not going to give $8k off sticker if they don't have to.

[ponchoman49]

they had $1500 on the hood

take a wild guess why GM increased the incentives to greater levels than Toyota's. Come Monday sales data for Toyota and GM will be released.

up to 48months not 60mo and this is still all dependant on the customer's credit rating.

what the dealer sells the Tundra for is their own business it has zero affect on how much money Toyota takes on the Tundra. Toyota dealers were plenty profitable before the Tundra went on sale.

the only independant comparison which placed the Silverado ahead of the Tundra was C&D, because it is too much of a truck

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/12...ota-tundra.html

MT, edmunds, CR, trailerboats and PM have prefered the Tundra

Strange that if MT preffered the Tundra to the Silverado that they would have named it Truck of the year. Both are 2007 models. And apparently you haven't read all of the MT articles because they keep giving the Silverado the nod as the better buy. It also won NA truck of the year over the Turdra. Get over yourself, the Tundra's one and only claim over the Silverado is outright HP at the cost of everything else.

Edited September 6, 2007 by ponchoman49

[Camino LS6]

Check the August sales figures:

GM - up

Toyota - down

Tundra- down, even with piles of cash on the hood. Put down the Japanese Kool-aid.

[Camino LS6]

See for yourself in this thread:

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...showtopic=19639

[K.C.]

Put down the Japanese Kool-aid.

Fortified with Saki

[bcs296]

Toyota's quality is slipping as evidenced by recalls and user reviews.

Toyota has (and will use) the cash to simply buy market share.

Some people (cough, toyoguy, cough) can't wait until America is run by Japanese companies.

[CaddyXLR-V]

Here's some Toyota kool-aid from Edmunds.com

The Camry is the second highest rated sedan, and the only car in the top 10 priced under $50,000.

Editor rating Consumer rating

2007 Mercedes-Benz S-Class 9.1 9.2

4 styles priced from

$85,750

2007 Toyota Camry

10 styles priced from 9.0 8.5

$18,470

2007 Lexus LS 460

2 styles priced from 9.0 9.3

$61,000

2007 Rolls-Royce Phantom

2 styles priced from 8.9 8.0

$333,350

2007 Maybach 62

2 styles priced from 8.8

$386,500

2007 Bentley Continental Flying Spur 8.6

1 styles priced from

$169,990

2007 Audi A8

3 styles priced from 8.6 9.8

$68,900

2007 Audi S8

1 styles priced from 8.6 9.6

$92,000

2007 Lexus GS 450h

1 styles priced from 8.6 9.2

$54,900

2007 Maybach 57 8.6

2 styles priced from

$335,500

[Camino LS6]

What the hell is the criteria for that list?!

Seems absurd.

[CaddyXLR-V]

What the hell is the criteria for that list?!

Seems absurd.

I was just messing around with the edmunds website one day, and it lets you sort the cars by the ratings they give. So I did. I'm still trying to figure out why anyone in their right mind would give the Camry a higher rating than the other cars on that list. Edited September 7, 2007 by CaddyXLR-V

[Camino LS6]

I was just messing around with the edmunds website one day, and it lets you sort the cars by the ratings they give. So I did. I'm still trying to figure out why anyone in their right might would give the Camry a higher rating than the other cars on that list.

Ah the limits of internet "truth". Faced with those choices side-by-side, it wouldn't happen.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Here's some Toyota kool-aid from Edmunds.com

The Camry is the second highest rated sedan, and the only car in the top 10 priced under $50,000.

Which is exactly why it shouldn't be taken as unbiased fact... It's pretty much impossible for the rating to be truthful given the price and substance disparity.

[sciguy_0504]

I knew it had been too long for FOG to go without a rant.

I'll just remember the next time I see a local GM dealer offering tons of cash back or an extremely low monthly payment I should make a new thread about it, generalize that every vehicle must have those incentives on the hood, and complain about how I don't like it.

[toesuf94]

I knew it had been too long for FOG to go without a rant.

I'll just remember the next time I see a local GM dealer offering tons of cash back or an extremely low monthly payment I should make a new thread about it, generalize that every vehicle must have those incentives on the hood, and complain about how I don't like it.

Don't spill the kool-aid sciguy - it is not a rant about 'every model' as you put it - only the Tundra...take another sip and relax.