Latest Mis-Leading Tundra Commercial
in [Toyota Trucks]
|
From: someone on 30 Oct 2009 17:29 In article <4aeafdfa$0$13693$ce5e7886(a)news-radius.ptd.net>, "Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2(a)lycos,com> wrote: >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. >> > > roses are red violets are purple sugar is sweet and so's maple surple! -little bobby dylan
From: C. E. White on 30 Oct 2009 18:19 ----- Original Message ----- From: "SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> Newsgroups: alt.autos,alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 4:27 AM Subject: Re: Latest Mis-Leading Tundra Commercial > 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. Over built? Overbuilt for what - carrying a couple of bags of groceries? Seriously, have you actually driven a current style Tundra? It is clearly inferior to anything form Ford or Chevy or even Dodge. You might be able to convince me it is superior to the Titan, but even that is doubtful. The Tundra isn't even as good as the Tacoma. It is the worst Toyota vehicle in at least a decade. If you were honest, you'd have to admit it was a massive screw-up. It still baffles me Toyota's management would spend so much money and end up with a POS like the Tundra. The only stride Toyota hit with the Tundra was a header off a cliff. Ed
From: C. E. White on 30 Oct 2009 18:20 ----- Original Message ----- From: <someone(a)some.domain> Newsgroups: alt.autos,alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:45 PM Subject: Re: Latest Mis-Leading Tundra Commercial > 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.) Worse than that...I let windows spell check for me... Ed
From: C. E. White on 30 Oct 2009 18:33 "dbu`" <nospam(a)nobama.com.invalid> wrote in message news:-4CdnU86zfdtj3fXnZ2dnUVZ_oCdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > 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. > > I was at my Toyota dealer today getting my Sienna serviced, oil change. > They had a demo board set up showing the difference between the Tundra, > F150, Dodge PU, Chev PU and Nissan, showing the tie rod, brake, frame > member. The Tundra seemed to have the most heavy duty components > compared with the rest. The tie rod and brake disk assy seemed to be > the two that stuck out the most. Maybe the Tundra is a pretty good > truck after all. But which Ford, Dodge, or Chevy - HD, SD, 2007, 2008, 2009? Ford did the same thing, and their parts looked better.... When you control the message, you can always make yourself look good. > The 2010 Prius is a mighty impressive vehicle too. It might be in my > future sights a couple years down the road. I was actually suprised how roomy the Prius is. My SO wishes she had one. I don't think it would be at the very top of my list for a new car, butI'd at least be willing to consider one - particaulrly if I changed my life style and had a shorter commute (more city miles). One of the guys at my office has one of the previous generation Prius (actually his wife's) and he is really happy with it - zero problems so far and great gas mileage (even on the highway). My SO's parent also have one of the prior version, and they love theirs too. They are very common around here and I have not heard anyone complaining about them. Ed
From: SMS on 30 Oct 2009 21:16
"dbu`" <nospam(a)nobama.com.invalid> wrote in message > > I was at my Toyota dealer today getting my Sienna serviced, oil change. > They had a demo board set up showing the difference between the Tundra, > F150, Dodge PU, Chev PU and Nissan, showing the tie rod, brake, frame > member. The Tundra seemed to have the most heavy duty components > compared with the rest. The tie rod and brake disk assy seemed to be > the two that stuck out the most. Maybe the Tundra is a pretty good > truck after all. Yes, that's why the Tundras last so long, and have higher resale value. They're built as real commercial trucks, not as a glorified passenger car. |