FHB Logo Facebook LinkedIn Email Pinterest Twitter X Instagram Tiktok YouTube Plus Icon Close Icon Navigation Search Icon Navigation Search Icon Arrow Down Icon Video Guide Icon Article Guide Icon Modal Close Icon Guide Search Icon Skip to content
Subscribe
Log In
  • How-To
  • Design
  • Tools & Materials
  • Restoration
  • Videos
  • Blogs
  • Forum
  • Magazine
  • Members
  • FHB House
  • Podcast
Log In

Discussion Forum

Discussion Forum

New Tundra PU

jcurrier | Posted in Tools for Home Building on March 19, 2007 09:04am

Abyone buy one yet?  I am going to get he!! for this statement, but I think they are going to sink the US trucks.  Whats your take on em’?

Reply
  • X
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • pinterest
  • email
  • add to favorites Log in or Sign up to save your favorite articles

Replies

  1. john7g | Mar 19, 2007 09:41pm | #1

    IIRC it's going to be hard to beat the torque of the Ford diesel (duck!) but I had an '84 4wd SR5 for 17 years (17!)(bought usedn '88) that got daily use/abuse and it's going to be hard for me to ignore that reputation the next time I'm looking for a truck.  Toyota makes good stuff and if their adds are all it says it is (whadya think?) it's going to be a stout truck.  Wonder if they'd make a work van if I asked them?

    1. MisterT | Mar 19, 2007 11:49pm | #4

      I really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really want Toyota to come out with a work van!Wars of nations are fought to change maps.

       But wars of poverty are fought to map change.

      1. john7g | Mar 20, 2007 12:00am | #6

        really?

        1. MisterT | Mar 20, 2007 12:14am | #8

          REALLY really!Wars of nations are fought to change maps.

           But wars of poverty are fought to map change.

          1. Piffin | Mar 20, 2007 12:45am | #9

            If you really can't get a sheet in and close the gate, it's really not a real truck now is it, really? 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          2. MisterT | Mar 20, 2007 01:07am | #10

            I got a full 8ft bed on my F*O*R*D but with the bed liner it is 95-15/16" you can slam it shut but with any more than 3 sheets you need a prybar to get it open!!!no wonder they are going under...Quality is Job 357,845,674Wars of nations are fought to change maps.

             But wars of poverty are fought to map change.

          3. User avater
            bobl | Mar 20, 2007 05:43pm | #26

            I have a spray-in liner, can get an 8'er in. 

            bobl          Volo, non valeo

            Baloney detecter    WFR

            "But when you're a kibbutzer and have no responsibility to decide the facts and apply the law, you can reach any conclusion you want because it doesn't matter." SHG

          4. CAGIV | Mar 23, 2007 04:25am | #67

            what year is yours?

          5. MisterT | Mar 23, 2007 02:06pm | #73

            1898Wars of nations are fought to change maps.

             But wars of poverty are fought to map change.

          6. PenobscotMan | Mar 21, 2007 05:40pm | #43

            I used to have a real truck - F150.  It definitely met your criterion of holding  4X8 sheets with the tailgate up.  Big deal -- it also was continuously in the shop, costing about $1000 a year on repairs, rusted out (even the metal holding the clutch cylinder went, but that didn't prevent the Ford dealership from selling me a new clutch job).  Fuel efficiency - don't even ask.

            Now I have a Toyota Tacoma, 4 cyl with 4WD.  It's true that I have to let 4X8 sheets hang over the tailgate, but I feel just as manly.  What about Made in America?  The F150 was made in Canada.

      2. Thaumaturge | Mar 20, 2007 05:02pm | #25

        As you might expect, Toyota has a pretty full line of commercial vehicles for sale in Japan and other countries.

        In particular the Hiace Van line can hold two pallets in the back with doors closed.  I'd like to see this vehicle get to our shores, but I doubt it will make it.

        Check out the Australian version here: http://hiace.toyota.com.au/toyota/vehicle/Content/0,4664,2168_762,00.html

        View Image

        Edited 3/20/2007 10:23 am ET by Thaumaturge

        1. MisterT | Mar 21, 2007 02:28pm | #41

          What I keep asking myself is: WHY NOT!!??given the Junk we are forced to choose from wouldn't Toyota stand to make a bundle offering dependable vehicles???I don't see how it is a whole lot different than what they did in the passenger vehicle segment over the last 30 years.If ya ask me the time is ripe...Wars of nations are fought to change maps.

           But wars of poverty are fought to map change.

          1. Thaumaturge | Mar 21, 2007 06:40pm | #44

            I agree with you completely.  Of course, the old right-side drive issue always slows things down.

            I think Toyota is still smarting from the original Previa van introduction in the US.  They took what was a commercial delivery van in Japan and tried to drop it into the US to compete with the domestic minivans.  Too narrow, too underpowered, too bad.  Now they seem to prefer to design here, build here, and sell here.

            Given that Toyota is about to take over as the #1 auto maker in the world, they will need  to be more aggressive in the commercial market in the US.  I am still disappointed it took them 20 years to figure out the US truck market.  But leapfrogging in product design has always been the Japanese way.

          2. FHB Editor
            JFink | Mar 21, 2007 08:34pm | #45

            Like many of you, I drool over the Toyota trucks, but I've been disappointed that the Tundra can only accept a Trac-Rac lumber rack, and the Tacoma won't accept any lumber rack, period.

            My question is whether the new Toyota's have solved that problem. I need to cart around 16' lengths of trim. For me - Without a lumber rack, a truck ain't a truck.  Justin Fink - FHB Editorial

            Your Friendly Neighborhood Remodelerator

          3. jesse | Mar 21, 2007 10:00pm | #46

            I see Tacomas with over-the-cab lumber racks every day.Anyways, I drive a Tacoma. Not a work truck for a contractor, but I love it. I am about to sell it and buy a four door (my work involves driving people around more than hauling stuff these days), and the blue book on my 04 with 40K miles is ~$16K. I bought it for $20,500 (nothing down, 1.9% interest), and owe ~$10K. So I will sell it and pocket $6K, which I will use for the next truck (Tacomas sell for high blue book or over here in western MT). I did the math, after owning it for 2.5 years and putting in ZERO maintenance other than standard oil change servicings, it works out to about $133 a month that the truck has cost me.Oh yeah. But wait, please don't get excited about Toyotas. The fewer of y'all who buy them, the better the incentives will be for me in May when I get a new one.So everyone, stick with your Fords that lose 50% of their value the second you drive them off the lot. Suckas. ;-)

          4. FHB Editor
            JFink | Mar 21, 2007 11:37pm | #47

            << I see Tacomas with over-the-cab lumber racks every day. >>

            What brand of rack? I have never seen one, and was told by the folks that make Trac-Rac (the only rack to fit a tundra) that there isn't a rack that will fit a Tacoma.Justin Fink - FHB Editorial

            Your Friendly Neighborhood Remodelerator

          5. Hazlett | Mar 21, 2007 11:59pm | #49

             what you do Justin---is you go to a welding shop------and have 'em weld you a REAL rack----not one of those erector set gizmos-----but one you can stack 6 ladders on,and a couple of Pic's,hang a brake off the side----you know--something you can do some real work with

            stephen

          6. MisterT | Mar 22, 2007 12:19am | #50

            mebbee you need a second opinion....Wars of nations are fought to change maps.

             But wars of poverty are fought to map change.

          7. reinvent | Mar 22, 2007 03:10am | #52

            That is what they tell you because the rack manufactures don't know how to deal with the composite bed. But I figured out a way.

          8. FHB Editor
            JFink | Mar 22, 2007 04:10pm | #59

            Well that's good to know. Thanks guys.Justin Fink - FHB Editorial

            Your Friendly Neighborhood Remodelerator

          9. davejames | Mar 22, 2007 04:37pm | #60

            Michigan currently has the highest unemployment rate in the country. I doubt that this is because Japanese auto companies are creating jobs here.  The name calling is unnecessary. To ignore the fact that the profits are going to the Japanese auto manufacturers is to ignore a basic fact. I have a feeling that the people that objected to my letter are driving Japanese cars and trucks.

          10. john7g | Mar 22, 2007 06:23pm | #61

            re: MI unemployemt based on automakers...

            Because US automakers don't make what the majority of people want.  People buy based on reputation, price, cost to own, image.  So why aren't Americans buying autos from the Big 3?

            BTW, I own Toyota, Ford & Dodge & have the most faith in the Toyota.

          11. Talisker2 | Mar 22, 2007 07:35pm | #62

            Here is a link to Prius information if anyone is interested. 

            http://ecrostech.com/prius/original/PriusFrames.htm

            So far I have been very happy with my first generation (03 w/75k mi.), bought new in 03.

          12. Thaumaturge | Mar 22, 2007 09:00pm | #63

            Name calling aside, you really should get out of Michigan once in a while. 

            The "buy American" ship has sailed.  Flag waving won't bring back those jobs.  Michigan has high unemployment because its economy is not diversified and other states are giving out big incentives to companies building factories.  Michigan was riding high with the big 3 several decades ago while other states were suffering.

            As you know, the big 3 sat on their collective backsides for several decades while others ate their lunches, not just the Japanese.  Remember "What's good for GM is good for the nation?"  Oh please.

            American corporations have more offshore operations than any other country, so I would not be pointing fingers related to profit siphoning.  We live in a global economy where corporations will move operations where it's cheapest regardless of national affiliation. 

            FYI, Japan is currently battling for its economic life with Korea and China.  Japan has most of our problems, plus many we don't have.  They have an aging workforce (not young), climbing labor rates, high resource import costs, etc. etc.  Why do you think all the made in Japan stickers from the 60's and 70's have been replaced by made in China, Korea, and Indonesia? 

            As for your rationale on the war...  I guess we should boycott the British too after the way they burned our capital in 1812.  

            Educate yourself a bit and get happy.

          13. freestate1 | Mar 23, 2007 12:04am | #64

            Interesting and timely article in today’s USA Today.<!----><!----><!---->

            For cars sold in the <!----><!----><!---->US<!----><!---->, percent of parts produced in the <!----><!---->US<!----><!---->:<!----><!---->

            Ford, GM, Chrysler – 77% to 78%.<!----><!---->

            Honda – 59%<!----><!---->

            <!----><!---->Toyota<!----><!----> – 47%<!----><!---->

            Nissan – 46%   <!----><!---->

            <!----> <!---->

            I agree that the argument of “profits flow to <!----><!---->Japan<!----><!---->” doesn’t mean much since they are publicly traded (would you avoid a Dodge since the profits flow to Daimler in <!----><!---->Germany<!----><!---->?).  But, on average, a Ford/GM/Chrysler vehicle does create more jobs in <!----><!---->America<!----><!----> than does a Honda/Nissan/Toyota.  <!----><!---->

          14. jesse | Mar 23, 2007 12:26am | #65

            "But, on average, a Ford/GM/Chrysler vehicle does create more jobs in America than does a Honda/Nissan/Toyota. "Especially in the mechanics industry. bwaha

          15. davejames | Mar 23, 2007 03:33am | #66

            I doubt the majority of Toyota's shareholders are American. I have a Bachelor of Science Degree from Lawrence Technological University. I don't need to educate myself. You need to consider another persons point of view besides your own. The war of 1812 was about 200 years ago. World War II was about 60 years ago. If you had friends and family that worked in the auto industy you might have a different view on things. I think Michigan is one of nicest states in the country. I don't plan on leaving anytime soon.

          16. brownbagg | Mar 23, 2007 04:55am | #68

            you know, Alabama has four foreign auto factorys here and getting another one this year

          17. User avater
            jocobe | Mar 23, 2007 05:51am | #69

            I find it funny as I read this thread. I have a Prius, Tundra, and then my Chevy Express 3500 for work. The Toyotas have been flawless, not a lick of problems. I like my van too, but recently I got a recall for the safety belt. So I take it to the dealer and he says my passenger seat, is actually a driver seat and the seat belt is installed incorrectly. Instead of the buckle end being secured in a threaded hole in the base of the seat, someone at the factory secured it with a bolt & nut through the sheet metal on the side. I guess I'm not too observant, but when sitting in the seat the belt actually goes over the top of the thighs rather then around the waist. GM has a consumer hotline and I was assigned someone to handle my case. He said he would call back the next day between 10:00 & 12:00.....he never called. So I called the next day and tried to leave a message and his mail box was full. After a week of calling every day, and not being able to leave a message, I'm waiting for another 'specialist' to return my calls.....great service.Honestly, just sitting in a Tundra, does anyone honestly think the 'Big 3' compare in quality? It's like a Yugo compared to a Lexus....jocobe

          18. BoJangles | Mar 23, 2007 06:38am | #70

            I own a Honda Accord, a Nissan Maxima and six Chevrolets.  I can tell you without a doubt that there is no comparison in quality or reliability between the Japanese cars and the Chevrolet trucks.

            The GM vehicles have been trouble since the day I bought them.  Oil leakers, wiper motors, door handles, hinge pins, drivetrains, electrical circuits....you name it and they have nickel, dimed, and $$$ me since I got them.

            GM refuses to acknowledge any of these problems but the mechanics at the dealerships say they have to fix this stuff constantly.

            Through a combination of high union wages and poor management, the big three have shot themselves in the foot.  The unions always want more and got it until the price of a vehicle got to be out of reach for many people.  Management was short sighted and greedy and it has all caught up to them.

            Their is a good reason why people are turning to Japanese or other manufacturers.  They make better quality vehicles at a cheaper cost.  It's as simple as that. 

            If you are associated with the automobile manufacturing in Michigan, I feel sorry for you because things will never be the same.  But there is plenty of blame to go around for the mess that the industry is in at this time and you can't blame it on the Japanese cars. 

          19. danski0224 | Mar 23, 2007 01:09pm | #71

            Through a combination of high union wages and poor management, the big three have shot themselves in the foot.  The unions always want more and got it until the price of a vehicle got to be out of reach for many people.  Management was short sighted and greedy and it has all caught up to them.

            (1) Management has had to approve any union contract representing labor and the wages and benefits package.

            (2) Is a comparable, non-union built automobile less expensive at the retail level than the union made counterpart? Is the Toyota Tundra any cheaper than a Ford, Chevy, GMC or Dodge? If there is a 20% discrepancy in wages, does that show up at the retail price level?

            (3) Is it really the price of the vehicle that is too expensive, or is it the devaluation of the dollar and the stagnation of wages paid to hourly employees?

            (4) Automakers have sold what consumers demanded (big, fast and inefficent)...The American business model has delivered what Wall Street has demanded (higher profits this quarter, no matter what corners are cut to get there)... Automakes have fought any initiative to increase MPG ratings because the technology is "too expensive"...

            Seems to me that everyone is getting what they paid for.... 

          20. BoJangles | Mar 23, 2007 03:20pm | #74

            1)  That's right.  Its part of poor management.  The auto makers would give them anything they wanted when they threatened to strike.  As long as the consumer was willing to pay more..the unions got more.

            2) No....but you get more for the money from the Japanese.  The quality of engineering and assembly in Japanese vehicles is light years away from what the big three produce.  The companies spend that profit in different ways.  Wages, benefits, and retirees obligations eat up everything at the big three.  The Japanese plants don't pay as much, pay more attention to quality, but still pay a good wage to the workers.  If they opened up a Toyota plant where I live, they would be standing in line for a mile to work there. 

            3) No, it is really the price of the vehicle that is too expensive!!!!  We started with 2 year loans, 3 year loans, 4 year loans, 5 year loans, and now 6 year loans to buy a vehicle.  Why do you think they are doing that????   If this continues, it will be a 10 year loan to buy a vehicle that is junk in 5 or 6 years.  I have a lot of friends in lower Michigan who work (worked) for the auto industry.  I would like to have wages & benefits stagnated at their levels.  

            4) Well I agree with most of that.  However, what they demand is big, fast, and efficient.  They haven't gotten that from anybody.  If the government doesn't force the issue of fuel economy, nobody will.  What you meant to say was "everybody is getting what they deserve" ???

          21. danski0224 | Mar 23, 2007 10:57pm | #78

            3) No, it is really the price of the vehicle that is too expensive!!!!  We started with 2 year loans, 3 year loans, 4 year loans, 5 year loans, and now 6 year loans to buy a vehicle.  Why do you think they are doing that????   If this continues, it will be a 10 year loan to buy a vehicle that is junk in 5 or 6 years... 

            Uhh, I don't think so. The purchasing power of the dollar has fallen. Wages (exclusive of CEO's) have fallen.

            The price of the average vehicle has increased with the cost of inflation (along with housing). The wages have not.

            A person earning $20 an hour in 1985 was a whole lot better off than the person earning $20 an hour today. 

          22. BoJangles | Mar 23, 2007 11:37pm | #79

            The price of the average vehicle has increased with the cost of inflation (along with housing). The wages have not.

            Maybe your wages haven't increased but I can assure you that the wages , and especially the benefits, of a union autoworker have increased....BIG TIME!!  Along with this they are bound to long term insurance and pension payments.  Don't be surprised to see some of these companies go under or declare bankruptcy if they can't work this out some how.

            You are saying exactly what I said, that the cost of the vehicles are getting beyond the reach of the average buyer.  Car dealerships today make most of their money selling used or leased program vehicles because that is the price range that most people can afford.

             

          23. danski0224 | Mar 24, 2007 12:04am | #81

            We are not saying the same thing.

            The average worker, earning $20 an hour in 1985 could buy more for the dollars spent that the same worker earning the same hourly wage today. The cost of the car has risen while wages have not. The car is not unaffordable, rather the worker is paid fewer equivalent dollars for comparable work performed. I would think, percentage wise, that the benefits package of the average unionized auto worker in 1985 is essentially the same as today.

            Workers building the Model T could afford one. So could lots of other average workaday Joes. It would be interesting to know what the inflation adjusted wages and cost of the car would be today.

            The big recent change in union pension plans is that they must be full funded today for the workers employed today, even though retirement is in the future. Union pensions are no longer able to use the same assumption rates that plain old corporations and the govenment use to tell their future retirees what is there for their retirement. This is why companies no longer offer defined benefit pension plans.

            If the Federal Govenment had to report Social Security the same way they make Unions report pension funding, the USA would be bankrupt- facing the same issues that the automakers are with legacy costs. Social Security is a defined benefit plan.

            So, union autoworkers make too much? What about lawyers, doctors, pro athletes, *gasp* contractors?

            The majority of the care offered by the health care industry is becoming "unaffordable" to many Americans. If the majority of the health care industry is not unionized, then who is to blame? Who is making too much money and is deserving of a pay cut to make health care affordable to low wage earning Americans (but, $10 an hour was good enough 20 years ago, so what's wrong with $10 an hour today)?

            The "too expensive" union argument is BS.

            My wages have increased over the last 10 years. The cost of almost everything else has increased faster, so unless I work more, or buy less, inflation has more than wiped out those gains.

            Edited 3/23/2007 5:12 pm ET by danski0224

          24. BoJangles | Mar 24, 2007 12:21am | #82

            I'm not anti union.  My wife and brother are both union workers.  I am trying to explain to you why the average person today has a hard time affording a new vehicle.

            The big three and Toyota operate in exactly the same market.  Why do you think Toyota is a profitable company and the big three are in financial trouble ? 

            What exactly do you think has made the cost of a car rise so much??  Why do you think Toyota can produce an excellent vehicle so much more cheaply than the big three can?

            The simple fact of the matter is that Toyota can get the same or better results out of a workforce that doesn't cost as much as the union force.  Until that labor cost evens out, the big three are going to be in financial trouble.

            There's plenty of finger pointing going on in the Michigan auto industry.

          25. danski0224 | Mar 24, 2007 01:52am | #83

            I guess if you are union, then you must be overpaid and the benefits must be too good. :)

            Hopefully the labor cost in your industry "evens out" so the product or service that you provide is "more affordable" to the "average person". :)

            In all fairness, you should approach your boss and ask him/her at what level would your wage and benefit package become more "affordable". Then ask at what point would your work output become more realistic ("affordable") in the employers eyes.

            Unfortunately, just about any American wage is not competitive in a global market- unless you set your own wages in a good old boys CEO club.

            Edited 3/24/2007 10:18 am ET by danski0224

          26. TrimButcher | Mar 24, 2007 08:44pm | #84

            "The simple fact of the matter is that Toyota can get the same or better results out of a workforce that doesn't cost as much as the union force."

            You've repeated this statement, but that doesn't make it true.

            My local Honda plant pays as much as a nearby Chrysler plant. I believe Toyota pays more.

            The Japanese get better results (higher productivity) from their workforce mainly because of significantly more process automation. They invest nearly double in robotics that American plants do. There is also a modest productivity increase because the Japanese can more easily fire workers who do not perform.

            Regards,

            Tim Ruttan

          27. BoJangles | Mar 25, 2007 12:36am | #85

            I didn't say "pay as much",  I said "cost as much".  There is a huge difference!

            Long term commitments to union workers and in most cases the cost of fringe benefits, vacations, leave etc. etc. , make the union workers much more "costly" to the automakers.

             

          28. john7g | Mar 25, 2007 01:24am | #86

            The cost of the labor force is only 1 aspect in this.  Where does the poor design, lack of appeal to the customer fall?  It's a significant fact as labor if not moreso. 

          29. BoJangles | Mar 25, 2007 02:36am | #87

            I think the consumer today is demanding efficiency, low cost of operation, and longevity from a vehicle.

            You have to pay such a price up front that you can't be paying a lot of money each year for repairs on the vehicle to keep it on the road.

            I think this is why a lot of people are turning away from some of the products the big 3 are offering.

            The new Toyota truck is not heavy duty enough to satisfy my needs, so I am going to have to stick with a GM , Ford, or Dodge,  but I think the half ton market in trucks may be in for some changes.

             

          30. TrimButcher | Mar 29, 2007 08:41pm | #106

            We're not talking about the U.S. versus China, we're talking about the U.S. versus Japan.

            You really claiming that the U.S. has a labour burden rate significantly greater than Japan's?

            Japan's labour burden rate is, I believe, higher than the U.S.'s. The reality is that the Japanese are far more productive and therefore able to reduce their labour cost per vehicle.

            Regards,

            Tim Ruttan

          31. BoJangles | Mar 30, 2007 02:53am | #107

            Well I agree with you there, but what does that have to do with a Toyota Tundra pickup.  They are made in the good old USA.

            I think the US auto makers have to establish engineering and quality standards like the Japanese have done and then make sure the labor force builds quality.

            I think the American work force is perfectly capable of doing quality work, it's just that the Big 3 have set a lower standard.

            It will be interesting to see how a built in America Tundra compares in quality with the American trucks.

            I also think the Japanese put much more emphasis on having a satisfied customer, whereas the Big 3 don't really give a hoot once you write the check.

          32. mcf | Apr 03, 2007 05:58pm | #110

            Toyota doesn't have the albatross of old agreements and obligations to deal with in their cost analysis...or the continued burden of employee benefits long past retirement.

             

            Toyota also has about a 1000 dollar less labor cost for vehicle. They are opening new plants in the US and will not have to worry about retire costs for some time.

            Edited 4/3/2007 11:01 am ET by mcf

          33. mcf | Apr 03, 2007 06:08pm | #111

            From The Wall Street Journal - 05/24/06 A Tale of Two Auto Plants:Pair of Texas Factories Shows How Starting Fresh Gives Toyota an Edge Over GMBy LEE HAWKINS JR. and NORIHIKO SHIROUZUARLINGTON, Texas -- For more than 50 years, General Motors Corp. has built cars and trucks here at Texas' only auto assembly plant, pumping billions of dollars a year into the state economy through taxes, purchases and paychecks.The sprawling factory, one of GM's best, employs 3,000 people and buys myriad parts and services from local suppliers to build the big sport utility vehicles that have been among the company's most profitable -- including Now, though, a rival has come deep into the heart of Texas to battle GM. At a 2,000-acre site in San Antonio, Toyota Motor Corp. is getting ready to start production later this year of the newest generation of Tundra pickup trucks in a plant that will use the Japanese car maker's most advanced machinery and methods.Separated by 280 miles, these two factories bring into stark relief the competitive problems plaguing GM at home at a time when car-building in the U.S. is thriving, even though American car companies are faltering. In no small part, the world's largest auto maker's difficulties stem from the fact that its challengers can start fresh, unencumbered by old plants and old obligations that limit innovation and add hundreds of dollars to the cost of each vehicle."GM has to stay within the box," says Michael Robinet, a vice president of Michigan-based research firm CSM Worldwide, which specializes in the auto industry. "Toyota was able to think outside the box."In Texas, Toyota appears to be working aggressively to make the most of its advantages. The company has been able to deploy the latest know-how to fit various manufacturing processes -- from stamping to welding to painting to final assembly -- into a relatively compact space and make the plant more efficient.On the other hand, even though Arlington is the country's most efficient large-SUV plant, GM can't maximize its success by adopting its newest, best methods there. "Arlington is doing a great job for GM, but they can't have an optimal layout, and their footprint is landlocked because a world with subdivisions and expressways has grown up around it, whereas Toyota was able to take out a clean sheet of paper," Mr. Robinet says.For example, GM's body shop is housed in a separate building, which was built in 2000 to introduce new technology. The bodies are transported on an elaborate, enclosed conveyor to the final assembly area, where they are painted and stored before being bolted onto frames. GM managers say they would use a more modern layout that would help boost the plant's productivity even more, but GM can't afford to shut down operations and completely rebuild the plant.Even so, Arlington ranked No. 1 among North American large-SUV factories last year, at 22.39 assembly labor hours per vehicle, according to Harbour Consulting, which functions as the North American auto industry's de facto productivity scorekeeper. Toyota's Princeton, Ind., SUV and pickup plant was well behind. Two decades ago, GM factories suffered from a sizable gap compared with similar Toyota factories, as measured in the number of hours it takes workers to build a vehicle. Recent Harbour surveys show that this gap has narrowed substantially. But GM's productivity gains are offset by higher hourly labor costs and the burden it carries for benefits owed to retirees.In Arlington, GM pays union-scale wages of $26.50 to $30.50 an hour to its 2,800 hourly workers there. On average, GM pays $81.18 an hour in wages and benefits to U.S. hourly workers, including pension and retiree medical costs. At that rate, labor costs per vehicle at Arlington are about $1,800, based on the Harbour Consulting estimate of labor hours per vehicle.In San Antonio, Toyota will use non-union labor and will start its 1,600 hourly workers at $15.50 to $20.33 per hour, which will grow after three years to $21 to $25. Harbour Consulting President Ron Harbour estimates Toyota's total hourly U.S. labor costs, with benefits, at about $35 an hour -- less than half of GM's rates. The brand-new plant won't have any direct retiree costs for many years. So if the San Antonio factory does no better than match the Arlington plant in productivity, it could still enjoy a labor cost advantage of about $1,000 per vehicle, a substantial sum in industry terms. That's money Toyota could translate into extra standard features -- such as stability control -- that could make its trucks more appealing.Being new means Toyota can use its most-efficient manufacturing technology, which the company has developed as part of a recent push to slash its production costs.The San Antonio plant is installing smaller, lighter machinery with a simpler design that takes up less space than previous generations of equipment, an effort Toyota calls "simple and slim." Smaller machines mean Toyota can spend less on the building that houses them, while simpler design means those machines are cheaper to install, easier to maintain, much less likely to break down and simpler to fix if they do. The plant covers about 2.2 million square feet, including some metal-stamping operations, which are not done in Arlington. Still, the Toyota plant is roughly a third smaller than the 3.75 million-square-foot GM plant.If Toyota had built the plant with the conventional technology, the plant would have been "30% to 40%" larger, says the plant's manager, Hidehiko "T.J." Tajima.As his engineers haul in and test new stamping presses and other heavy equipment in San Antonio, what's equally important to Mr. Tajima is what's missing. Toyota's newest U.S. factory doesn't have shoulder-high shelves lining the assembly line to hold parts for workers. Instead, the parts for each vehicle are delivered in a small container inside each car, freeing workers from having to pick out the right parts from the shelves. The missing shelves coupled with the smaller machines turn what would ordinarily be a dark and noisy place into one that is airy and well lighted."We try to come up with break-through innovation in every major equipment and process," Mr. Tajima says, pointing to an example where engineers replaced heavy parts conveyer systems with lighter and more flexible robots.Further, Toyota has arranged for 21 key Tundra suppliers to set up factories right on the same site, sandwiching the plant on the north and south sides. Engines still come from a Toyota plant in Alabama and axles from a supplier in Arkansas, but most other major parts, from instrument panels to seats to exhaust systems, are assembled at those on-site suppliers. That cuts the cost of transporting parts and storing large inventories on site as insurance against missed shipments. It also eliminates risks of having too many components en route to San Antonio -- a potential logistical nightmare that could cost Toyota dearly if a defect suddenly appears.There are risks for the on-site suppliers, though. They cannot spread their costs over different products from multiple auto makers, which makes them vulnerable to a downshift in demand for Toyota's big trucks.GM, in contrast, is restricted by space, existing deals with suppliers who are located elsewhere and its agreements with the United Auto Workers that prohibit it from using lower-wage, non-union workers on the same site. Of the total 3,330 different kinds of parts that are supplied to the Arlington facility, about 1,075 come from Michigan suppliers, while 739 come from Texas and the rest from Canada and Mexico.Having suppliers located far away has a price tag. Shipping costs have increased in the wake of rising gas prices, GM says, but it is difficult to estimate how much compared with previous years, when Arlington was building older generations of SUVs that required fewer parts because they were available with fewer options.Moreover, because the Tundra plant brings new jobs to San Antonio, Toyota, which chose the city over a rival site in Arkansas, has been able to bargain for a generous package of subsidies from various levels of government. The state gave a total of $133.25 million in direct incentives, including a reprieve from utility bills and a discount on property taxes, along with road improvements worth $57 million. The city, along with other agencies, spent $18 million screening 100,000 job applicants for the plant.The direct incentives alone, averaged over roughly one year's production, amount to more than $600 per vehicle in savings for Toyota.Even though it has made significant investments in Arlington in recent years, GM no longer gets the same pampering. Since 1996, GM has spent about $910 million on the plant and converted it from building cars to making SUVs. In 2000, GM installed more than 600 robots in an overhaul of the plant's body shop, where the frames and underbodies of trucks are fabricated.Much of this new investment, however, is deemed by the state and other government agencies as job-retention rather than job-creation, meaning GM doesn't qualify for incentives similar to those offered Toyota."We spend $280 million in payroll in a year, $1.6 billion every year to suppliers in this state. I can give you data from here to the moon and back," said Mike Glinski, manager of the GM Arlington plant. "The appropriate word for how I feel," he added, "is 'disappointed.' "Arlington's SUVs and San Antonio's Tundras won't directly compete, although both are designed to appeal to American consumers who like quintessentially American vehicles: big, V-8-powered, body-on-frame trucks. But Toyota is clearly sensitive about appeals to economic patriotism by GM, which calls itself the "global car company that's proud to be American." The Japanese auto maker has mounted an aggressive campaign to win over public opinion in Texas and elsewhere, by highlighting its U.S. investments.About a third of all cars built in the U.S. last year were assembled in the 14 plants owned by foreign-based auto makers, according to CSM. Japanese car companies are the biggest investors, having spent $28 billion to build North American factories and as much as $45 billion a year on parts here. Japanese auto makers say two-thirds of the cars they sell in North America are made here.Toyota executives routinely downplay the threat the company's growth poses to traditional American auto companies. But there's little doubt that Toyota has big plans for using the new San Antonio factory to grab a chunk of market share in the large pickup market, one of Detroit's last bastions of profit. The current Toyota Tundra has a 5.5% share of the full-size pickup market so far this year, compared with 35.9% for the Ford F-series, and 27.6% for the Chevy Silverado -- the two best selling big pickups in the U.S.When San Antonio hits its full capacity of 200,000 vehicles a year, Toyota will be able to produce more than 300,000 Tundras a year in the U.S., counting capacity at an existing factory producing Tundras in Princeton, Ind. But the company is unlikely to stop there.To explain the layout of the San Antonio plant, Mr. Tajima asks an assistant to bring him a blueprint of the complex. The blueprint shows a second plant next to the new Tundra factory. Mr. Tajima jokes that the space is just a golf driving range. But in the end he says it is "a possible future expansion area" for a second assembly line. A Toyota spokesman says no decisions have been made on the second plant.

          34. User avater
            bobl | Mar 28, 2007 01:39am | #93

            http://www.westegg.com/inflation/index.htmlinflation calculator. 

            bobl          Volo, non valeo

            Baloney detecter    WFR

            "But when you're a kibbutzer and have no responsibility to decide the facts and apply the law, you can reach any conclusion you want because it doesn't matter." SHG

          35. User avater
            bobl | Mar 28, 2007 01:51am | #94

            What cost $3500 in 1970 would cost $18590.65 in 2006.Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 2006 and 1970,
            they would cost you $3500 and $658.93 respectively. 

            bobl          Volo, non valeo

            Baloney detecter    WFR

            "But when you're a kibbutzer and have no responsibility to decide the facts and apply the law, you can reach any conclusion you want because it doesn't matter." SHG

          36. tjinfl | Mar 28, 2007 02:02am | #95

            I used to have the same opinion that many have expressed about Toyota quality, but my experience over the past two years with my 2005 Sequoia has changed my mind. I've experience a hard "clunk" after coming to a stop ever since this beast was new.  The Toyota service department said "yeah, that's normal - they all do that..." I said that's BS, they may all do it, but it's not normal. 

            Research on the web uncovered a splined joint in the rear drive shaft (it's a 4WD) that supposedly goes "dry" too quickly resulting in it binding when coming to a stop. Releasing the break, releases the tension in the suspension and thus the "clunk".  I've greased that joint a few times, but it's hard to tell if that fixes the problem.  The next time I went to the service department, I was told it was "lash" in the rear differiential... That's a bunch of "lash" that I never experienced on my Tahoe...

            The other problem I've had is brake chatter after only 19K miles. They resurfaced the rotors to correct it - after 19K miles! Since the rotors they use these days have less metal for resurfacing, I guess I need to get rid of it before the brakes go again... Guess they under engineered the braking system...

            Other than that, it's been great...

            Terry

          37. john7g | Mar 28, 2007 02:11am | #96

            re; break chatter: does it feel like warped disks?  If so be sure to torque the wheel nuts correctly.  I had the same on my 01 4runner after tire balance & rotate.  Don't know if the Sequoia is the same buildup but on the 4runner the disc floats on the wheel studs/bolts with the caliper being the only thing holding it on with the wheel removed.  It's my impression that the disk warps if the nuts are over torqued or torqued unequally. 

          38. BoJangles | Mar 28, 2007 02:47am | #98

            That's a very common problem, especially on imported cars.  Always use a torque wrench to tighten lugs.

          39. danski0224 | Mar 28, 2007 02:13am | #97

            Well, that is pretty interesting.

            Maybe more like depressing....

            Thanks

          40. john7g | Mar 23, 2007 01:43pm | #72

            I would't blame it on the unions.  At the inception of every new contract management knows exactly what their labor costs will be for the life of that contract.  Management then needs to figure out what it will take to make the company viable and meet the contract requirements.  The Big 3 management have not paid attention to what the customer wants.  If they would've they'd have no problem selling cars and staying afloat.  Japanese automakers didn't move to the top just because they were Japanese, they built what buyers wanted. 

          41. BoJangles | Mar 23, 2007 04:01pm | #75

            Here's how that works....The unions make demands.  They try to get as much as they possibly can.  If they don't, they threaten to strike and shut at least one of the big three down for a long period of time. 

            With the gun held at their head, the management gives in and once again raises the price of the vehicle, hoping the public will once again suck it up and pay out.  This can only go on for so long before a vehicle gets too expensive.  We are at that point now.  To make a profit, the automakers would have to charge much more to cover the wages, benefits, and future obligations to the workers.  They can't do this because the Japanese and others are building vehicles at lower costs.  You may see the vehicles priced comparably in the market, but this is a false and short time thing.  The big three are losing money and the Japanese companies are making money.  The big three can't stay in business with labor and benefit costs the way they are now.  It's as simple as that.  If they don't automate more and start building more of their vehicles with non-union outsourced parts, they will be out of business.  That's the stark reality of the business.

            I have a very good friend who was a top executive at Ford.  I asked him why we are not getting any of these new auto plants built in Michigan.  He said that even with huge incentives offered by the State, the foreign automakers are "afraid" of the union mentality in the workforce here and will probably never build a new plant anywhere near the plants in southeastern lower Michigan. 

            You certainly can't lay all the blame on the unions.  The automakers always looked at profit in a short term way.  Whatever worked for the next year or two was OK with them as long as they made money. 

            Eventually competition in the market reveals a winner and it takes a long time for a company that has fallen behind to rebound.  The only way to survive in the business is to give the customer a really good vehicle at a price that is affordable to the masses.  The big three assumed that things could go on forever as they were and everyone would profit.  Obviously that's not the case now.

            I think people are sick and tired of paying a small fortune for a vehicle and then having it bleed their wallets all the time they own it.

             

          42. NumberNine | Mar 23, 2007 05:43pm | #76

            I took a Tundra for test drive yesterday, the dealer apologised for his appearance...he has to wear work boots, jeans and a Toyota logo Carrhart jacket. They also have engineered lumber hanging from the ceiling and lift kits on most of the showroom trucks. It felt like they were trying too hard but when I compare it to the B3 who seem to think a string of balloons and a low APR are enough to sell it makes me wonder.

          43. Piffin | Mar 28, 2007 01:33am | #91

            once again - the profits go to the stockholders of the company. And so do the jobs. Roughly half of the Toyotas sold in this country are manufactured here. Roughly 70% of GM autos sold here are made here, and foreigners can own stock in GM or Ford just the same as in TM 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          44. ebeveridge | Mar 21, 2007 11:39pm | #48

            I am on my second <!----><!---->Toyota<!----> I had a 99 <!----><!---->tacoma<!----><!---->. After 156000 miles no work wanted a bigger truck so got me a 05 tundra with the 4.7 engine runs great I will never own another brand. My buddy has a 02 ford 250 and puts about 1k a year into it I have a lot of fun picking him up at the shop.

          45. davejames | Mar 22, 2007 04:43am | #53

            I have read this thread with great interest. People do not seem to realize that Japan is a small island nation.For this reason they don't have much room to build auto factories. This is why Japanese autos and trucks can be advertised as being built in North America. Where do people think the profits for Japanese auto companies end up? You can bet that the profits don't end up in North America. Also, the Japanese are able to manipulate the yen to their advantage. They have a younger work force requiring fewer pensions. I can't believe that people think the quality is so much better with Japanese autos and trucks. This is a myth perpetuated by the media. The fact that I come from a G.M. family and was raised in the suburbs of Detroit probably have a lot to do with my opinions. Don't people realize that the U.S buys everything the Japanese make and they buy only Levi's and JBL loudspeakers? Sorry for the rant,but problems like this are wrecking this country. If I had a choice I would not buy anything Japanese. As a final thought, does anyone remember how the Japanese behaved in World War II? Don't tell me that was in the past. My Dad and his brother served in the Marines in World War II. 

          46. Piffin | Mar 22, 2007 04:56am | #55

            OK, WWII was in the future, not the past." You can bet that the profits don't end up in North America."You'll have to stow that line in the bilge where it beongs. Anybody can buy stock in Toyota motors and share in the profits. A lot of those profits stay in this country along with the jobs they create that way. Capitalism is a great system that way. The ineffcient are weeded out and the more efficient are rewarded. 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          47. jesse | Mar 22, 2007 06:52am | #57

            You are totally delusional. Anyone can own stock in any corporation. Just because a company is based in the US doesn't mean the profits stay here. Welcome to the 21st century. It's a crazy place.

          48. Piffin | Mar 22, 2007 04:44am | #54

            any good metal fab shop can solve that problem 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

      3. User avater
        JeffBuck | Mar 23, 2007 11:39pm | #80

        "I really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really want Toyota to come out with a work van!"

         

        U work?

         

        Jeff    Buck Construction

         Artistry In Carpentry

             Pittsburgh Pa

    2. brownbagg | Mar 20, 2007 04:20am | #16

      I had an '84 4wd SR5 for 17 years dont feel bad, I have a 85 toy 4wd and a 85 toy 2wd. bought both brand new, still have them, still drive daily and got a 06 tacoma work truck

      1. john7g | Mar 20, 2007 04:30am | #17

        I feel bad becasue I don't have it anymore but the window posts were rotting out and some yokel was begging me to buy it.  Never had a for sale sign on it and got $1600 for it.  325,ooo miles.  20-21 mpg. 

        1. donpapenburg | Mar 20, 2007 04:53am | #18

          If the standard bed is less than 96 " it is not a truck.

          My preferance is to buy from a company that has a long history  of trucks .  I see more old GMC chevy and ford trucks than ferin ones When was the last time you saw a 48 or 56 Toyota?   

          They also should be advertising ASSEMBLED in Tex from part shiped in from Japan. 

          1. john7g | Mar 20, 2007 05:24am | #19

            > If the standard bed is less than 96 " it is not a truck.<

            No doubt!

            >...48 or 56 Toyota? <

            Don't think Toyota was around back then but how many '84 Fords or Chevy or GMC got 325k miles without any major maintenance?  The Big 3 got into the reliability and longevity game on a large scale long after Toyota.  I don't know anyone that's had a truck from the Big 3 as long as I had mine.   Not saying it's impossible or never happened for a Big 3 but I see it happening far more often with Toyotas than Big 3. 

            If you're looking for a pissing match, might as well look elsewhere.

          2. donpapenburg | Mar 20, 2007 05:46am | #20

            Not at all. just fact ,a lot of fords and chevys around even dodges fromthe 50s  We have a 49 chevy .There are a lot of old IH trucks out there also . Our Chevy is starting its third trip around .It has been reringed and a valve job, but that ain't major  .  I have a 48 Diamond T still hauling also ,but I don't see as many of them as GM and Fords.    Toyotas might be a good truck and if I see a lot of old ones on the road in another 30 years I might think about looking into getting one.

          3. mike585 | Mar 20, 2007 06:03am | #23

            My FIL has a '49 Chevy that he actually used for work until going to a '79. Still has the '79 GMC 1 Ton.  Recently bought a fully loaded Tundra. No real work for that guy.

          4. john7g | Mar 20, 2007 02:09pm | #24

            We have different idea of what major work is.  Rings to me is major.  Toyota of 17 yrs: original rings, original crank bearings.  Had the oil pan off the first time I did the timing chain never again after that. Timing chain 2x.  Changed the rear main seal while I was doing the clutch becasue it was right there. That's the list of the most extensive work I had to do to the truck. 

          5. donpapenburg | Mar 21, 2007 05:34am | #40

            The reason for the ring job is that the truck was used for short trips many were less than two miles . If it could have been on the road longer it would not have neededrings

          6. Piffin | Mar 20, 2007 10:27pm | #32

            "There are a lot of old IH trucks out there also "LMAO - they are all parked as lawn decorations or being used as trellises, right? Iknow where four of them are doing just that for the paast fifteen years or so.;)I gotta sstart another truck thread - "What is the .... 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          7. donpapenburg | Mar 21, 2007 05:01am | #39

            Didn't say them binder trucks were running.

          8. brownbagg | Mar 20, 2007 05:49am | #21

            my dad first toyota was three years after they first hit united states. it was a 72 toyota pickup. I got it, in 76 and drove it till I bought the 85

          9. TheMason | Mar 27, 2007 11:11pm | #89

            97 F250 4x4 210,000 on it, worked hard pretty much every day and knock on wood no major problems yet.

          10. john7g | Mar 27, 2007 11:22pm | #90

            read post #2 of this thread from me.  What Ford was building in 97 is a far cry different than what they built in '84 when my old toy was built that I use for comparison.  Not syaing the Big 3 aren't on the curve, just behind it.   If I get to the point of pulling something everyday Ford diesel would be my choice...

             

             

             

            ...until Toyota matches it.  The big 3 have lost not only my faith but the majority of buyers. 

          11. BoJangles | Mar 28, 2007 01:35am | #92

            You know what I really can't understand is....why on earth do they have to build all of these four wheel drive trucks so high???

            Anybody that actually uses these for a work truck wants it low so you can get in the box or in to your tool boxes mounted on the box.

            I don't think any of them really have the contractor in mind even though they are all pushing them as the ultimate work trucks.

            Edited 3/27/2007 6:36 pm ET by BoJangles

          12. TheMason | Mar 28, 2007 02:23pm | #102

            I was not arguing with you I agree Toyota seems to be great trucks I had a 86 when I first started out just doing repairs and it was a great truck. I was just joining in the conversation.

          13. john7g | Mar 28, 2007 02:30pm | #103

            My apologies for misunderstanding you on that, no arguments here either. 

             

          14. gb93433 | Apr 03, 2007 04:26pm | #108

            "I was not arguing with you I agree Toyota seems to be great trucks I had a 86 when I first started out just doing repairs and it was a great truck."In my opinion not one auto dealer makes a great truck compared to Freightliner, Peterbilt and Kenworth.When you consider that any tractor going down the road with 80,000 will go 300,000 miles before a top overhaul and 6-750,000 before a major overhaul makes every car and pickup look like junk. Those big trucks will sometimes get 10-11 miles/gallon while a pickup loaded or pulling a trailer often will not do much better and soemtimes worse.

          15. ravz | Apr 03, 2007 05:42pm | #109

            All should check out this video clip, its hilarous stress testing of a toyota pickup.. they destroy this thing, and it will not die..

            http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=9a1f6477beb1e1486dc10138285bee51.505090

          16. User avater
            bobl | Mar 20, 2007 05:47pm | #27

            "They also should be advertising ASSEMBLED in Tex from part shiped in from Japan. "my F150 was built in Canada. 

            bobl          Volo, non valeo

            Baloney detecter    WFR

            "But when you're a kibbutzer and have no responsibility to decide the facts and apply the law, you can reach any conclusion you want because it doesn't matter." SHG

          17. MisterT | Mar 20, 2007 06:00pm | #28

            out of parts from Izbekistan and Mongolia...Wars of nations are fought to change maps.

             But wars of poverty are fought to map change.

          18. MisterT | Mar 20, 2007 06:00pm | #29

            and Elbonia!!!Wars of nations are fought to change maps.

             But wars of poverty are fought to map change.

  2. Stray | Mar 19, 2007 09:41pm | #2

    They do look nice.  I have a 10yo Toyota T100 (before they made the Tundra).  I've been very happy with it.

    I think the Tundra has already been digging into other auto mfr's piockets for a few year;  but that's nothing but capitalism at work... 

     

  3. notagain | Mar 19, 2007 11:32pm | #3

    I took a test ride in one............very very nice. Very comfortable, which at my age (48) is getting more and more important.

    A friend of mine has a friend in a Toyota dealership. He says that they are not selling as many as fast as they had hoped so they'll probably start some kind of incentive system soon.

    The best I could get from the test ride was 5.9% financing, and maybe $1800.00 off list. Maybe.

    $34,000.00 truck - $1800.00 @ 5.9% with $8000.00 down........I'd still be paying $500.00/month for 5 years. (Why oh why get a truck without an 8' bed, just makes no sense to me)

    I want it.

    But not that bad. So.........I'll still keep looking and maybe something will turn up. I've got time to wait, which is always an advantage.
    Rod

    Rod

    1. john7g | Mar 20, 2007 12:02am | #7

      Maybe I missed something. Are you saying you can't get a 4x8 in the bed and close the tailgate? 

      1. notagain | Mar 20, 2007 01:18am | #11

        No........I assume you can fit a 4 x 8 sheet but maybe I better check, rather than assume.What I'm saying is...........I can't see buying a truck with anything other than an 8' bed. These "trucks" with a 6 or 6 1/2 ' bed just don't cut it with me. Personal preference for sure. Rod

        1. theslateman | Mar 20, 2007 01:28am | #12

          Those short beds are made for snowboards,hockey sticks and soccer balls, not sheetrock,advantech and shingles.

          1. seeyou | Mar 20, 2007 01:55am | #13

            >>>>>>>>>>>>Those short beds are made for snowboards,hockey sticks and soccer balls, not sheetrock,advantech and shingles.Well, I prefer a short bed (with an extended cab), because I mostly deal with 10' lengths, so the tailgate's gotta be down anyway. And I often have to get trailers into tight spots, so the shorter wheelbase makes manuevering them easier. Works better overall for me.http://logancustomcopper.com

            http://grantlogan.net/

            "We have enough youth, how about a fountain of smart?"

             

          2. Piffin | Mar 20, 2007 10:12pm | #30

            Now that you mention it, I mostly have a lot of misc junk in the back and the cabover rack handles longer stuff anyways. I'm really more of a Van guy, but some stuff, like trailering and hauling big items needs the truck 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          3. seeyou | Mar 20, 2007 10:55pm | #34

            My current GMC is the only truck I've ever had without racks. But, I've got a 16' trailer with them that I use to haul long stuff and don't suffer the air drag (better mileage) when I don't need them and I can park in parking structures.http://logancustomcopper.com

            http://grantlogan.net/

            "We have enough youth, how about a fountain of smart?"

             

          4. Piffin | Mar 21, 2007 12:31am | #35

            Parking structures - now why didn't I think of that?;) 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          5. vintage1 | Mar 20, 2007 02:01am | #14

            I have been keeping an eye on Toyota for several years.  Prev. models never seemed big enough.  I even had one salesman tell me that the T100 was "a 7/8 full size truck."

            The new Tundra has me interested though.  Occasionally I wish for an 8' bed but I have always traded that off to have an extended cab.  (Currently have GMC ext cab, w/6.5 box). 

            I know the domestics make ext cabs w/ 8' box but that gets to be one long truck.  Add my 14' trailer to that and it can be real difficult to maneuver around a remodeling site.   

            This new Tundra interests me because I think they finally have a legit competitor to domestic full size trucks and I think they have better longevity (as a company).

            Just my two cents

          6. Piffin | Mar 20, 2007 10:21pm | #31

            Longevity as a company only matters if you are buying stock in it.Longevity in the vehicle matters if you buy to keep it long term. I buy work trucks used and run them till the wheels fall off, so to speak.So I'm paying attention to this new truck because I might own one in a few years. I've always been happy with GM though, and their new system of banking the engine back to four cylinders is interestiong for fuel economy too. 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          7. vintage1 | Mar 21, 2007 01:29am | #36

            When I said, "longevity as a company" 

            I meant that Toyota cars/trucks in general seem to last a very long time.  I couldn't honestly say that this incarnation of the Tundra will have longevity, because it has just been released.  So I was making a general statement about their products. 

            I want a vehicle to last a long time because I put a lot of miles on each year.  At approx. 20k/yr.  I don't want the service life to be over just as the loan is paid off.  Likewise, I don't want to spend thousands for transmissions, cracked heads,front ends, U joints, etc,etc,etc. 

            I have known several people who have put 150k-200k+ on Toyota vehicles (Tacoma's and T100's included) with little more than routine maintenance. 

            I have owned both a dodge and my current GMC for work trucks.  I spend more money than I want to fixing things on those vehicles.  My general feeling is that an import will last longer than a domestic.  

            Having said that, to each his own, there are plenty of people who will swear by Ford, Dodge, GM, whatever.

          8. notagain | Mar 21, 2007 01:41am | #37

            Having just put $3200.00 into a brand new transmission for my 2003 Ford Explorer, (which I still owe $8000.00 on), I'm looking for something else. The Explorer is my wife's daily driver, and I've accused her of being a bit "hard on the riggin'",but I don't believe she did anything to ruin the tranny. Apparently it's the luck of the draw with those things.I'd like to be a bit more "lucky" in my next vehicle purchase. I've never owned foreign, but I am looking. Rod

          9. JonE | Mar 21, 2007 05:17pm | #42

            I swear AT my F150 (new in '99, has 145K on it).  I've put $15k in parts on it since it went out of warranty - including an engine, brake rotors and complete exhaust system from headers back.  Neither the heat nor air conditioning currently work, and the thing is rapidly turning into a rust bucket.   My wife's Durango has 43K on it and is already showing signs of an early demise.  

            Is there anybody who can speak to an apples-to-apples comparison of the new Tundra to an equivalent Ford, Chevy or Dodge in terms of payload, towing capacity and general "toughness"?  Reason is, I'd like a new truck but need to get something that's equivalent to a "3/4 ton" - F250/2500HD series.  I dunno if the Tundra is at that level.  It'll be mostly for towing a 16' trailer, with small diesel tractor or a couple thousand BF of rough sawn lumber on it.  Right now the F150 struggles mightily to pull it. 

        2. reinvent | Mar 20, 2007 03:59am | #15

          Standard bed 78.7"
          Long bed 97.6"Now go get one.http://www.toyota.com/tundra/specs.html

    2. unTreatedwood | Apr 03, 2007 06:51pm | #112

      excuse my blatant ignorance about trucks....but do most of the full-sized pickups have 8' beds?  I have been using a suburban for 15 years and it has worked fine, but I only do weekend gigs."The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a governmental program"  -Ronald Reagan 

      1. notagain | Apr 03, 2007 09:53pm | #113

        It seems to me about a 50/50 split. Most trucks without an extended cab, generally speaking, have an 8' bed.Usually, a truck with an extended cab, (or a 2nd full size seat), will have a shorter bed to keep the overall length of the truck down. Some people have trouble driving a longer truck.Some people prefer a shorter bed. FWIW, I've been working out of a Ford Explorer for about 6 or 7 years now. I've got a 9'dually flat bed for when I need to haul some heavy or awkward stuff, (staging, etc) , but the Ford is so much more comfortable as a daily driver.BTW, I built my "Tundra", online, and sent out queries to 2 local dealerships. I've gotten the "automatic" replies back.....Thank you for giving us the oppurunity to serve you, etc. etc.But no real numbers yet. Rod

      2. USAnigel | Apr 04, 2007 12:14am | #114

        Not any more, most are sold as "toys" not worker trucks.

        1. eleft | Apr 04, 2007 02:20am | #115

          Hey!

           the difference between men and boys is the price of the toys

  4. doodabug | Mar 19, 2007 11:52pm | #5

    I think they advertised made in Indiana and Texas?

  5. User avater
    AaronRosenthal | Mar 20, 2007 05:59am | #22

    Just for one second, I'm going to get off the topic of trucks and just talk Toyota.
    Back when I owned a taxi here, someone came back from Japan & told a bunch of us that drivers were telling him their Toyota taxis were going 300,000 + Kilometers without touching the engines or transmissions. Naturally, we told him he was nuts. Our engines were getting 200,000 and needing replacement (Chev V8s).
    This was about the time that there was all that advertising about Toyota pickup owners getting 400,000+ miles and still driving the vehicles without needing work.
    Now, the mechanics tell me that over half the fleet are Toyotas: Prius, Camery etc., and the only work the mechanics do on these things are brakes. Some of these things have 500,000+ on them.
    If they ever get a long bed and/or a van, look out.

    Quality repairs for your home.

    AaronR Construction
    Vancouver, Canada

     

    1. Piffin | Mar 20, 2007 10:32pm | #33

      My fiorst introduction ti Toyotas was in the seventies. They didn't have much of a parts distribution system back then. Every body I knew who had one had it laid up in the back yard or the dealershiop waiting for parts to ship - from Japan... anywhere from six weeks to four months. They actually DO break down sometimes, in spite of the reputation.Back then, the advertising jingle went - "You asked for it..."There was a hidden meaning there 

       

      Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

  6. gb93433 | Mar 21, 2007 03:01am | #38

    I have a Tundra I bought in 2000. It has an 8' bed and will haul a full sheet of plywood between the wheel wells. My brother worked for Toyota until recently and saw a Tundra come in for service with 411,000 miles on it.

  7. robert | Mar 22, 2007 02:05am | #51

     OK, I guess I should preface this by saying............I hate Toyota's. My last F-150 went over 300K miles and still didn't burn oil. Any japanese truck I've ever owned was scrap after 100K.

     Having said that, more than a few of my friends have traded their Fords and Dodges for Nissan Titans and Toyota Tundras. Granted, not the latest Itteration of the Tundra.

     Having ridden in and driven one of each. I remain unimpressed.

     I was at Lowes earlier in the week when I had a day off. As I went past the Ford/Toyota dealer I spoted the new Tundra from far away. thinking it might be one of the new Super Duty's I'm in love with I stopped to look.

     It's a nice looking truck. But up close........................it's really just a 3/4 scale model of the kind of truck a grown man might drive.

     I wouldn't jump to buy one just yet. Motor Trend and Car and Driver both had Brake Problems with their long term last generation Tundra test trucks. They have also complained about too much flex and squeek and body rub in the four door versions.  SO much so as to warrent multiple trips to the dealer for it.

     I'd wait a while and see how they did.

     It looks like there might be a car in my near future. But my next truck...........And everyone after that will be a Ford or a Chevy. And hopefully next time with a Diesel.

     

  8. Stan | Mar 22, 2007 06:33am | #56

    I test drove one about a month ago.  When I did a couple of things caught my attention.

    1.  Now I am 6'1" tall, I do not need the assist handle built into the column support to get into the truck.  The steering wheel works just fine.  When I drove the Tundra that assist handle was in 'my face" the entire time.  It just made me feel awkard.

    2. Toyota built the Tundra with some real power.  With that said, it sounded like it would have no problem sucking your wallet dry for the fuel it would consume.

    1. reinvent | Mar 22, 2007 08:10am | #58

      You could replace the assist handle with these.http://www.customtacos.com/forum/showthread.php?t=77702

      1. Stan | Mar 27, 2007 10:42pm | #88

        Now you are tallking!

  9. thinkerf | Mar 23, 2007 07:59pm | #77

    What an interesting thread!  I'm definitely coming from the Toyota camp as I've owned a 2006 Tundra double cab for the past year and a half.  My needs are specific to my situation and this truck has met every one of my expectations thus far.  I'm a young guy and I have only owned a handful of vehicles but they have been an eclectic bunch; Volvo 760, Mercedes 300SD, Toyota Celica and my last vehicle was a Range Rover Classic.  It's funny how loyal you can become to a brand, even if it's not the best in class, as was my experience with my Range Rover.  I was fiercely loyal to Range Rover even as I spent countless hours working to keep mine going.  My Tundra was my first new car purchase and I really was thinking 20 years down the road when I purchased it.  I looked at Chevy and Dodge but knew I could be in trouble 5-8 years from now.  As far as the state of the 'Big 3'.  When the American auto industry shunned process improvements in the 40s and 50s that started the domino effect.  Up till recently their only perceived competition was amongst themselves, so if they all shared the same business model then it must be okay, right?  They have put themselves in this situation and have no one else to blame, especially not the consumer.  It's a sad day when your patriotism dictates that you purchase inferior products.  When it comes to keeping profits in America I have to think twice about the horrible mismanagement and corruption at the high levels of corporate America.  Toyota is doing a great job of opening up highly efficient plants and making U.S. employees very happy. 

    As I said earlier, brand loyalty makes you do strange things.

     

    Ryan   


    Edited 3/23/2007 1:01 pm ET by ThinKerf


    Edited 3/23/2007 1:02 pm ET by ThinKerf



    Edited 3/23/2007 1:03 pm ET by ThinKerf

  10. Piffin | Mar 28, 2007 04:30am | #99

    I haven't emailed you yet. Just wanted you to have a chance to know the facts if you have any interest. I even did a little more research for you.

    Of the twenty largest holders of Toyota stock, at least nineteen of them are American. I haven't gotten around to seeing if GM or Ford has that much. The total TM stock owned by insiders is less than 1%

    In my life, I have owned 20-30 American branded cars and one Toyota. The fact that the Toyota is made in America was a major factor in the decision to buy it or not.

     

     

    Welcome to the
    Taunton University of
    Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
     where ...
    Excellence is its own reward!

  11. Piffin | Mar 28, 2007 04:56am | #100

    sorry that the economy there is hurt by people making the choices they make.

    It is helping the economy in mississippi

    http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/news/07/0228.html

    http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/relationship/index.html

     

     

    Welcome to the
    Taunton University of
    Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
     where ...
    Excellence is its own reward!

  12. eleft | Mar 28, 2007 05:18am | #101

    1000 words

    1. ebeveridge | Mar 28, 2007 02:59pm | #104

      Nice exhaust what kind is it thinking putting a new one on my truck

      1. eleft | Mar 28, 2007 11:54pm | #105

        The exhaust is factory installed.

         I couldn't get larger windows in my Continental  trunk so I ordered this, it's just a plush and smooth.

         

        al

Log in or create an account to post a comment.

Sign up Log in

Become a member and get full access to FineHomebuilding.com

Video Shorts

Categories

  • Business
  • Code Questions
  • Construction Techniques
  • Energy, Heating & Insulation
  • General Discussion
  • Help/Work Wanted
  • Photo Gallery
  • Reader Classified
  • Tools for Home Building

Discussion Forum

Recent Posts and Replies

  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
View More Create Post

Up Next

Video Shorts

Featured Story

Podcast Episode 692: Introduction to Trade Work, Embodied Carbon, and Envelope Improvements

Listeners write in about fostering trade work and proposed changes to Canadian code and ask questions about roof and wall insulation for an old house.

Featured Video

How to Install Cable Rail Around Wood-Post Corners

Use these tips to keep cables tight and straight for a professional-looking deck-railing job.

Related Stories

  • Podcast Episode 692: Introduction to Trade Work, Embodied Carbon, and Envelope Improvements
  • FHB Podcast Segment: Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Building Codes
  • Old Boots Learn New Tricks
  • Install Denim Insulation Like a Pro

Highlights

Fine Homebuilding All Access
Fine Homebuilding Podcast
Tool Tech
Plus, get an extra 20% off with code GIFT20

"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.

Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox

Signing you up...

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
See all newsletters
See all newsletters

Fine Homebuilding Magazine

  • Issue 332 - July 2025
    • Custom Built-ins With Job-Site Tools
    • Fight House Fires Through Design
    • Making the Move to Multifamily
  • Issue 331 - June 2025
    • A More Resilient Roof
    • Tool Test: You Need a Drywall Sander
    • Ducted vs. Ductless Heat Pumps
  • Issue 330 - April/May 2025
    • Deck Details for Durability
    • FAQs on HPWHs
    • 10 Tips for a Long-Lasting Paint Job
  • Issue 329 - Feb/Mar 2025
    • Smart Foundation for a Small Addition
    • A Kominka Comes West
    • Making Small Kitchens Work
  • Issue 328 - Dec/Jan 2025
    • How a Pro Replaces Columns
    • Passive House 3.0
    • Tool Test: Compact Line Lasers

Fine Home Building

Newsletter Sign-up

  • Fine Homebuilding

    Home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox.

  • Green Building Advisor

    Building science and energy efficiency advice, plus special offers, in your inbox.

  • Old House Journal

    Repair, renovation, and restoration tips, plus special offers, in your inbox.

Signing you up...

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
See all newsletters

Follow

  • Fine Homebuilding

    Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X
    • LinkedIn
  • GBA Prime

    Get instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
  • Old House Journal

    Learn how to restore, repair, update, and decorate your home.

    Subscribe Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X
  • Fine Homebuilding

    Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X
    • LinkedIn
  • GBA Prime

    Get instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
  • Old House Journal

    Learn how to restore, repair, update, and decorate your home.

    Subscribe Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X

Membership & Magazine

  • Online Archive
  • Start Free Trial
  • Magazine Subscription
  • Magazine Renewal
  • Gift a Subscription
  • Customer Support
  • Privacy Preferences
  • About
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Careers
  • Terms of Use
  • Site Map
  • Do not sell or share my information
  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility
  • California Privacy Rights

© 2025 Active Interest Media. All rights reserved.

Fine Homebuilding receives a commission for items purchased through links on this site, including Amazon Associates and other affiliate advertising programs.

  • Home Group
  • Antique Trader
  • Arts & Crafts Homes
  • Bank Note Reporter
  • Cabin Life
  • Cuisine at Home
  • Fine Gardening
  • Fine Woodworking
  • Green Building Advisor
  • Garden Gate
  • Horticulture
  • Keep Craft Alive
  • Log Home Living
  • Military Trader/Vehicles
  • Numismatic News
  • Numismaster
  • Old Cars Weekly
  • Old House Journal
  • Period Homes
  • Popular Woodworking
  • Script
  • ShopNotes
  • Sports Collectors Digest
  • Threads
  • Timber Home Living
  • Traditional Building
  • Woodsmith
  • World Coin News
  • Writer's Digest
Active Interest Media logo
X
X
This is a dialog window which overlays the main content of the page. The modal window is a 'site map' of the most critical areas of the site. Pressing the Escape (ESC) button will close the modal and bring you back to where you were on the page.

Main Menu

  • How-To
  • Design
  • Tools & Materials
  • Video
  • Blogs
  • Forum
  • Project Guides
  • Reader Projects
  • Magazine
  • Members
  • FHB House

Podcasts

  • FHB Podcast
  • ProTalk

Webinars

  • Upcoming and On-Demand

Podcasts

  • FHB Podcast
  • ProTalk

Webinars

  • Upcoming and On-Demand

Popular Topics

  • Kitchens
  • Business
  • Bedrooms
  • Roofs
  • Architecture and Design
  • Green Building
  • Decks
  • Framing
  • Safety
  • Remodeling
  • Bathrooms
  • Windows
  • Tilework
  • Ceilings
  • HVAC

Magazine

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Magazine Index
  • Subscribe
  • Online Archive
  • Author Guidelines

All Access

  • Member Home
  • Start Free Trial
  • Gift Membership

Online Learning

  • Courses
  • Project Guides
  • Reader Projects
  • Podcast

More

  • FHB Ambassadors
  • FHB House
  • Customer Support

Account

  • Log In
  • Join

Newsletter

Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox

Signing you up...

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
See all newsletters
See all newsletters

Follow

  • X
  • YouTube
  • instagram
  • facebook
  • pinterest
  • Tiktok

Join All Access

Become a member and get instant access to thousands of videos, how-tos, tool reviews, and design features.

Start Your Free Trial

Subscribe

FHB Magazine

Start your subscription today and save up to 70%

Subscribe

Enjoy unlimited access to Fine Homebuilding. Join Now

Already a member? Log in

We hope you’ve enjoyed your free articles. To keep reading, become a member today.

Get complete site access to expert advice, how-to videos, Code Check, and more, plus the print magazine.

Start your FREE trial

Already a member? Log in

Privacy Policy Update

We use cookies, pixels, script and other tracking technologies to analyze and improve our service, to improve and personalize content, and for advertising to you. We also share information about your use of our site with third-party social media, advertising and analytics partners. You can view our Privacy Policy here and our Terms of Use here.

Cookies

Analytics

These cookies help us track site metrics to improve our sites and provide a better user experience.

Advertising/Social Media

These cookies are used to serve advertisements aligned with your interests.

Essential

These cookies are required to provide basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website.

Delete My Data

Delete all cookies and associated data