Latest Mis-Leading Tundra Commercial
in [Toyota Trucks]
|
From: SMS on 29 Oct 2009 16:22 Sir F. A. Rien wrote: > DETROIT (AP) � General Motors' (GM) U.S. sales plunged 21.3% in June and > Ford (F) dropped 8.1% while Toyota (TM) reported a 10.2% sales surge > compared with a year ago. > Light-truck sales were up 11.9%, led by the redesigned Tundra full-size > pickup. > "Tundra really hit its stride this month, posting a record sales pace," Jim > Lentz, executive vice president of Toyota's U.S. division, said in a > statement. "In a short five months, the new truck's earned its stripes with > both loyal Toyota owners and those new to the brand." The Tundra has always been a favorite of contractors and those that use their trucks for actual work and not just farting around. Last week I was at In 'N Out and parked between an Ford crew cab and a Tundra crew cab. The Tundra was a few years old with steel racks carrying 2x4's and PVC, a tool box in the bed, and a big old vise on the bumper. Three construction workers got into it as I got out of my car. The Ford crew cab had two child seats in the back, and a mom was getting her two toddlers out of the back. The above scenario is very typical. The Ford is a passenger car replacement for those that have occasional need for a truck for towing a boat or trailer, or picking up gardening stuff from the home improvement store. Heck, if I were going to buy a Ford, I'd buy one of their trucks as well. The Tundra customer is buying a truck because they need a reliable work vehicle, not a passenger car. Oh, and as someone pointed out in a previous post, the Tundra has higher domestic content.
From: C. E. White on 29 Oct 2009 16:59 "SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message news:4ae5c972$0$1603$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net... > The biggest problem with the Tundra is that not enough buyers are willing > to pay premium for toughness or longevity. When I was pricing trucks last February, the Tundras were heavily discounted. I actually paid more for an F150 than I was qouted for a Tundra with similar equipment (smaller V8, Access Cab). One trip down a rough road convinced me the Tundra was a no go. Try running one over a few bumps with the tailgate down and you wouldn't want one either. It was painfully obvious the Tundra was the inferior truck. Toyota builds some fine vehicle. The Tundra isn't one of them. I probably would be able to get buy with a Tundra, but I prefer something that is overbuilt to something that is just good enough to get buy. A Tundra wouldn't last some farmers I know a year. The frame is too weak, the sheet metal to timmy. And given Toyota mediocre reliabilty record of late and high Toyota repair prices, I couldn't see taking a chance on a Tundra with my money. Ed.
From: someone on 29 Oct 2009 21:45 In article <pfSdnUwnF6u2n3fXnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, "C. E. White" <cewhite3remove(a)mindspring.com> wrote: > >"SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message >news:4ae5c972$0$1603$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net... >> The biggest problem with the Tundra is that not enough buyers are willing >> to pay premium for toughness or longevity. > >When I was pricing trucks last February, the Tundras were heavily >discounted. I actually paid more for an F150 than I was qouted for a Tundra >with similar equipment (smaller V8, Access Cab). One trip down a rough road >convinced me the Tundra was a no go. Try running one over a few bumps with >the tailgate down and you wouldn't want one either. It was painfully obvious >the Tundra was the inferior truck. Toyota builds some fine vehicle. The >Tundra isn't one of them. I probably would be able to get buy with a Tundra, >but I prefer something that is overbuilt to something that is just good >enough to get buy. A Tundra wouldn't last some farmers I know a year. The >frame is too weak, the sheet metal to timmy. And given Toyota mediocre >reliabilty record of late and high Toyota repair prices, I couldn't see >taking a chance on a Tundra with my money. > >Ed. > the sheet metal is timmy? what about lassie, too? getting buy? you mean by? (i don't proofread either.)
From: SMS on 30 Oct 2009 04:27 I'm Right wrote: > That is odd when I drive I see 30+ year old Chevy, GMC, Ford and a Dodge > once in a while. > Chevy PU's from 73-87 are everywhere, the 88-98 are too as well as the newr > chevys > I see 80-86 Fords, 87-97 fords and up. Dodges are mostly 94 and up, with a > few older 88-ish with a cummins. > I do see a few 89-94 Toy PU. The truck they should have kept building. Toyota really hit their stride with Tundra. It's rather over-built, but that's why it lasts so long. If you want something that's just "good enough" but cheaper truck that will last 1/3 as long. The Tundra has a stronger frame and thicker steel throughout. But it goes beyond just the design, Toyotas are also more reliable, repairs are reasonably priced, and parts availability is excellent.
From: Mike Hunter on 30 Oct 2009 10:53
That may be your opinion but please tell us what if the color of the sky in your world? LOL "SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message news:4aeaa377$0$1613$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net... > I'm Right wrote: >> That is odd when I drive I see 30+ year old Chevy, GMC, Ford and a Dodge >> once in a while. >> Chevy PU's from 73-87 are everywhere, the 88-98 are too as well as the >> newr chevys >> I see 80-86 Fords, 87-97 fords and up. Dodges are mostly 94 and up, with >> a few older 88-ish with a cummins. >> I do see a few 89-94 Toy PU. The truck they should have kept building. > > Toyota really hit their stride with Tundra. It's rather over-built, but > that's why it lasts so long. If you want something that's just "good > enough" but cheaper truck that will last 1/3 as long. The Tundra has a > stronger frame and thicker steel throughout. But it goes beyond just the > design, Toyotas are also more reliable, repairs are reasonably priced, and > parts availability is excellent. > |