Toyota Tundra: First Impression
in [Toyota]
|
From: DH on 5 Mar 2007 14:49 "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2(a)mailcity.com> wrote in message news:O-2dnc-D3flZ9HHYnZ2dnUVZ_h6vnZ2d(a)ptd.net... > Does that mean you realize Fords can and do last a long time and can and > do go up rather than down in value? ;) > > mike Sure. If you want to buy one of today's Fords and put it carefully away in storage for a while, it will probably have considerable value as an antique in 12,007AD. The judgement of the market, though, is that if you also put a Toyota carefullly away in storage and bring it out at the same time as that Ford, that the Toyota is more likely to start and run, which is part of the reason that they sell for better prices than Fords and probably will in 12,007AD, too. Somewhere in between here and 12,007AD, they will both bottom out in value, of course, with the Toyota not bottoming out quite as hard. So, don't be a jerk. The collector market has little in common with the transportation market and needs. A friend has a late 40's Buick. He keeps a drip pan under it at all times and would not consider driving it 20 miles to work under any cirumstances; he has a Honda for actual transportation. > "dh" <dh(a)stargate.com> wrote in message > news:45eb7dcd$0$16335$88260bb3(a)free.teranews.com... >> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2(a)mailcity.com> wrote in message >> news:dYSdna3e7JYc93bYnZ2dnUVZ_hmtnZ2d(a)ptd.net... >>> Does that mean your think I should get rid of my 1941 as well as my >>> 1964, 1971, 1972, and 1983 because the will not last very long? Maybe >>> I should sell them. They have from 110K to 300K on the clock and worth >>> at least four to ten times what I paid for them ;) >>> >>> mike >> >> Of course not. The "needs" of a car collector are different. If Ed's >> "SO" buys ONE car and keeps it for a good long time and replaces it with >> ONE car, that's hardly the behavior of a collector. >> >> As in, don't be a jerk. >> >>> "dh" <dh(a)stargate.com> wrote in message >>> news:45eb4841$0$16321$88260bb3(a)free.teranews.com... >>>> "C. E. White" <cewhite(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message >>>> >>>> Reality check - I just looked to see what's offered for sale around >>>> here in Escapes and Ravs. The median asking price for Escapes is >>>> $5,000 less than for the Rav ($9K vs $14K). >>>> >>>>>> I didn't think so... <G> >>>>> >>>>> I ponited out it is irrelevant to someone who drives a car until it is >>>>> dirt. >>>>> >>>>> Ed >>>> >>>> Actually, it's not. Needs change and if you've bought a car that >>>> depreciates like it was going over a cliff, that limits your options >>>> when your needs change. >>>> >>>> And superior long-term reliability is *really* important to people who >>>> drive the car forever. I don't think Ford's there quite yet. >> >> >> >> -- >> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> > > -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: Ed White on 5 Mar 2007 15:12 On Mar 5, 2:17 pm, "Jeff" <n...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > Don't forget that Toyota designed the hybrid components in the Escape (they > are similar to the ones in the Prius). They get some of hte props, too. Most of "Toyota's" hybrid technology was aquired by buying Aisin- Warner. It is interesting, if you go to the Aisin-Warner's web site, they freeely admit to selling hybrid components to Ford. They never mention that they also sell them to Toyota. Toyota seems to enjoy projecting the image that they developed the technology internally instead of buying up the company that actually developed the technology. Ed
From: DH on 5 Mar 2007 15:53 "Ed White" <ce.white3(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1173125570.415463.152040(a)c51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > On Mar 5, 2:17 pm, "Jeff" <n...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Don't forget that Toyota designed the hybrid components in the Escape >> (they >> are similar to the ones in the Prius). They get some of hte props, too. > > Most of "Toyota's" hybrid technology was aquired by buying Aisin- > Warner. It is interesting, if you go to the Aisin-Warner's web site, > they freeely admit to selling hybrid components to Ford. They never > mention that they also sell them to Toyota. Toyota seems to enjoy > projecting the image that they developed the technology internally > instead of buying up the company that actually developed the > technology. > > Ed And GM does not seem to enjoy remembering they decided there was no market and should not build them. Bob Lutz, their "Car Czar" recently said, "it turns out that it's an advantage in the auto industry to be seen as a technological leader." Hmph. Imagine that. I never would have guessed... However, GM has regained technological leadership with an exciting concept car, the Chevy Volt, which they can not build because they do not have the batteries. But it looks cool at auto shows, so they're the leader again. [snicker] I'll say this for GM, though: if they get the battery and build it, the Volt concept is unique in that there's no mechanical drivetrain from engine to wheels, which makes the vehicle simpler, lighter, more efficient and, perhaps, makes it easier to package the components for the real world. No differential, no transmission, traction control becomes a matter of directly varying electric power to each wheel motor. The engine runs at optimum speed whenever it runs. I wonder if they'll purpose-build an egine for it with, say, Atkinson cycle and maybe the flywheel replaced by the power generator assembly, which doubles as starter motor and no alternator, fully electric support (electric water pump, which runs at optimum speed only as necessary), no belts, etc. They *could* edge ahead of Toyota a bit with it. We'll see. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: Jeff on 5 Mar 2007 16:56 "DH" <dh(a)stargate.com> wrote in message news:45ec76c4$0$16322$88260bb3(a)free.teranews.com... > "Ed White" <ce.white3(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:1173125570.415463.152040(a)c51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... <...> > I'll say this for GM, though: if they get the battery and build it, the > Volt concept is unique in that there's no mechanical drivetrain from > engine to wheels, which makes the vehicle simpler, lighter, more efficient > and, perhaps, makes it easier to package the components for the real > world. This is a good concept. However, it is a concept that has been in use since the fifties. I often take advantage of it when I go into New York City. http://travel.howstuffworks.com/diesel-locomotive.htm It should be noted that locomotives don't store the energy in batteries, which makes the Volt different. > No differential, no transmission, traction control becomes a matter of > directly varying electric power to each wheel motor. The engine runs at > optimum speed whenever it runs. I wonder if they'll purpose-build an > egine for it with, say, Atkinson cycle and maybe the flywheel replaced by > the power generator assembly, which doubles as starter motor and no > alternator, fully electric support (electric water pump, which runs at > optimum speed only as necessary), no belts, etc. They *could* edge ahead > of Toyota a bit with it. We'll see. I doubt they would go all electric (water pump, valve train), etc., at first. Later, perhaps. The Prius and Escape use Aktinson cycle enginess. Jeff
From: Ray O on 5 Mar 2007 17:10
"Ed White" <ce.white3(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1173125570.415463.152040(a)c51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > On Mar 5, 2:17 pm, "Jeff" <n...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Don't forget that Toyota designed the hybrid components in the Escape >> (they >> are similar to the ones in the Prius). They get some of hte props, too. > > Most of "Toyota's" hybrid technology was aquired by buying Aisin- > Warner. It is interesting, if you go to the Aisin-Warner's web site, > they freeely admit to selling hybrid components to Ford. They never > mention that they also sell them to Toyota. Toyota seems to enjoy > projecting the image that they developed the technology internally > instead of buying up the company that actually developed the > technology. > > Ed > The Toyota's ownership in Aisin goes back way before they even came to the U.S. From my "insiders" experience, I'd say that Toyota developed the technology and had Aisin produce it, which is how Toyota usually works. -- Ray O (correct punctuation to reply) |