motor

xbeakerx · 02-11-2008, 11:38 PM

Originally Posted by nthfinity

Logic vs. emotion....

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy these "Arguments" dichotomy in a forum is a wonderful thing

If we all agreed, it would be a boring place

yeah i know... now this is my last post...

Toyota Rules...hahaha

HeilSvenska · 02-12-2008, 02:02 AM

Sigh.

Well. Toyota sucks. That's the end of that. There's the fake power ratings that were discovered couple of years ago, overrated Prius mpgs (granted, the previous mpg calculation was flawed and most cars lost couple of mpgs, but Prius lost like 15mpg from the previous claims), poorly engineered, poorly built, poor quality (granted, American manufacturers can be worse, but Toyota shouldn't be so proud), overpriced, ugly as sin, overhyped... I can go on forever. And one thing Toyota owners somehow cling onto... reliabilty. Despite the fact that Toyota issued more recalls than anyone last year, especially with trucks. Some of them were quite serious too. Steering issues, engine failures etc...

Before anyone lashes out against me, I'll say that my mother has a Camry that's few years old, I advised her against it, but she bought one anyways lulled into a false sense of reliabilty about the car. She thought that Japanese built ones would be more reliable. I can't blame her, though. People told her those things. Poor misinformed people. First, the ride makes me sick every time I'm in it (not soft/not hard enough). The seats are uncomfortable. The plastics's really easy to scratch. The plastic dials still have uncut trimming from the press mold. The fit's not that great inside. The engine sounds sick. It cost too much. And, best of all, it's not reliable. The left taillamp went out once. We replaced it with original Toyota parts, it broke again. We replaced the bulb and the cover. Then the right lamp went out. And it makes a strange sounds when it's turning... She says she's happy with it, but mostly because it's her car(she said so.).

Maybe I'm not being fair, because in a way Camry is the worst car ever built, mostly because so many people bought one.

Oh, and I haven't even brough up Scion, the biggest marketing failure of its kind. Designed specifically for under 23 year olds. Insanely popular with seniors everywhere. Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

So yeah. Toyota sucks.

And that's the end of that.

79TA · 02-12-2008, 02:33 AM

Originally Posted by xbeakerx

yeah i know... now this is my last post...

Toyota Rules...hahaha

Well, the ruler knows who to go for to towing . . .

http://www.motorworld.net/forum/show...=toyota+towing

79TA · 02-12-2008, 02:46 AM

Originally Posted by xbeakerx

for one the chicago auto show is what it is "a show".
my arguement will never get to you. you will always be Toyota haters because you are afraid of what it will become, a BETTER Truck then Ford, Chevy and Dodge. think of this, Toyota has always had Great trucks in the past, some of the BEST off-road truck in the world. The FJ40, 4-Runner, and the 80-90s Truck! The Tundra will be as just a great truck or better them all. So no matter what i say in this thread you will not listen and just say it was RIGGED or its FAKE. so my word are just falling on deaf ears and blind eyes...

for the no real work comment, i know of a company in my area that has all Tundras for their work trucks. they are a construction business for building steel erections. the owners go to my church and absolutely love them over the ford trucks they use to own. so yes they can do REAL work...

i'm glad i'm not the only in this thread that is a Toyota person...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npGDIP3lmg4

Of course it was for a show . . . even as a fake display it was ludicrous though. It just made good symbolism for the way Toyota does business. As for small trucks of the 1980's, the Jeep Comanche puts all the cheaply built Toyota's to shame. The Jeep was light with unibody construction, had an available dana 44 rear end (probably beefier than anything in the new Tundra), a double walled bed (as opposed to the single walled cheapness of Toyota), and the much torqier 4.0 litre inline 6 cylinder. It's just unfortunate that more Comanches weren't built.

It sounds like your friends with the Tundra must like underpowered trucks with bad gas (worse than Chevy on both counts of the same model years) mileage if that fleet is made up of the last gen Tundra. If they're all new, then it sounds like they've got quite a bit of money on their hand and don't do too much of the work that puts heavy loads on pick ups. My family currently has two work trucks; a 1994 GMC 2500 with 210k on the odometer and no major problems thus far. We beat that poor truck pretty badly with loads of 1.5 tons on several occassions. Now it doesn't do as much heavy work as we use our 2001 Chevy 2500 HD (it just passed the 200k mark as well). The most we've taken to the dump with it so far is just 1.75 tons. The dump is actually a good place to see how trucks behave in the real world. It's fun to pull up to a guy in a last gen tundra all squatted down with a comparatively light load. Of course, those are merely HALF TON trucks. Because no Tundra is yet a 3/4 ton truck, I have serious cause to doubt that your friend's business does anything that I'd describe as "abusive" with them.

graywolf624 · 02-12-2008, 06:28 PM

NO acceleration and the handling was garbage

If your expecting it to handle and accelerate like a car... Like Ive read the tundra does... Then youve just discovered the tundras achiles heel. Making a truck handle like a car makes it garbage for towing and load carrying.

Speaking of which you havent even mentioned which f150 you drove. considering there are many different models not saying much.

dutchmasterflex · 02-12-2008, 08:39 PM

I'm am not surprised as this is really an American Toyota and have always wondered how it compared to the quality of a real Japanese Toyota. Too bad they do not make a big enough version of the "indestructible" HiLux to compete with the American trucks.

nthfinity · 02-12-2008, 11:05 PM

Originally Posted by dutchmasterflex

I'm am not surprised as this is really an American Toyota and have always wondered how it compared to the quality of a real Japanese Toyota. Too bad they do not make a big enough version of the "indestructible" HiLux to compete with the American trucks.

IMHO, it has little to do with 'quality' of US built vs. Japanese built...... it is a case of a poorly engineered car in our modern era.

79TA · 02-13-2008, 01:06 AM

That does remind me of the one advantage Nissan and Toyota have both taken advantage of. They know that to start out, they'll sell to a niche market. Because of that, they just sell a big V8 glory truck. They don't bother with any entry V8's or fleet V6's like Ford/Dodge/Chevy do. This allows people to compare apples (16k fleet V6 trucks) to oranges (premium option V8 Tundra with base prices from 22k to 28k) and then bow down to Toyota.

dutchmasterflex · 02-13-2008, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by nthfinity

IMHO, it has little to do with 'quality' of US built vs. Japanese built...... it is a case of a poorly engineered car in our modern era.

Yeah, I meant engineering quality.. All Toyota trucks sold in the American market are engineered and built here.. I wonder how the Hi-Lux would stand up to the same tests.

gobs3z · 02-13-2008, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by xbeakerx

can you prove that the tundra had 4x4 on? in the ram video the tundra spinned his tires first., so tell me why is this FAKE FAKE FAKE???

The Tundra spinning its tires first is a result of a lack of grip, but it really just showed the differential locking up. Once the rear tires lost grip the differential sent power to the front wheels to get grip with all FOUR tires. Be honest, it was rigged, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't do well against the competition if they had done it right, it was just a dealership stunt that actually made them look bad.

nthfinity · 02-13-2008, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by dutchmasterflex

Yeah, I meant engineering quality.. All Toyota trucks sold in the American market are engineered and built here.. I wonder how the Hi-Lux would stand up to the same tests.

It would likely do well against trucks from the same era, Jeep Commanche not withstanding... that was by far the 100% best light truck from that era...

dutchmasterflex · 02-13-2008, 01:28 PM

I was refering to the new Hi-Lux that isn't sold in the US, even in rebadged form... and specifically tested in that chassis flex weight test. The old Hi-Lux(which they tried to kill on Top Gear) was actually sold here, just not with the diesel engine I think.

Anywho, I would still take a Tacoma X-Runner over a F150 Lightning

HeilSvenska · 02-13-2008, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by dutchmasterflex

Anywho, I would still take a Tacoma X-Runner over a F150 Lightning

Why even bother with a light pickup? You can't do much with it. For $25,000, why wouldn't you can get a real pickup that can actually haul?

I just don't like small pickups with "sporting" pretensions.

nthfinity · 02-13-2008, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by dutchmasterflex

Anywho, I would still take a Tacoma X-Runner over a F150 Lightning

For a light sporting truck, my preference would be the S-10 Z 71 (might have the model designation wrong, but the big suspension OE S-10)

But ya, the x-runner isn't too bad...

the F150 Lightning chassis was crap... with a fantastic motor... just ask RC how well those lightly modded one's did against his Z06 before it became Camzilla

dutchmasterflex · 02-13-2008, 02:21 PM

Yeah man.. the Lightning was a perfect example of a beast.

I driven both the Lightning and X-Runner.. for the Toyota's 4.0 V6 it had a good amount of grunt to it.. enough to haul around anything I would ever want to, and still be able to handle some nice turns.

The Lightning just begs you to do brake stands.. well, thats what it was telling me at every time I came to a stop..